2004 richmond draft picks

[TIGER 03]

*sigh*

having another dig at richmond are you

here is how i would have them 12 months on :

1 deledio

2 tambling

3 pattison

4 mcguane

5 polo

6 meyer

just the way i see it at the time bluey.

[Judge Roughneck]

Deledio
Thursfeild
Tambling
Meyer
McGaune
Pattison
Polo

Meyer the darkhorse 

[Stripes]

Crock of poo. They lucked out on Buddy plain and simple. If they were so certain he would become the star he most certainly has they would have taken him with their first pick. All this rolling the dice rubbish sounds great in retrospect but everyone, inclusing Hawthorn, rated Bling over Buddy. It was a toss up between Tambling and Roughhead at the time, Franklin wasn't part of the equation.

I hate hearing this 'Drafting-Masterstroke' brought up. It's always sold as intentional but the truth be known the draft feel the way it did because no one rated Buddy above Lids, Bling, Roughhead or Griffin. In fact I remember hearing that experts were surprized that Buddy went as high as he did given his attitude and poor performance at the TAC Cup.

Let's write this article when we near the end of their careers and see where they all rate then.

Stripes

[tigersalive]

Deledio
Thursfeild
Tambling
Meyer
McGaune
Pattison
Polo

Meyer the darkhorse 

Dont kid yourself.

Meyer is still at the bottom of that list until he actually shows something at AFL level.

[Infamy]

Robbo and Buckenara revisit the 2004 draft in today's Herald-Sun from Hawthorn's view

... Richmond went for Brett Deledio at No. 1, the Hawks opted for Jarryd Roughead, the Bulldogs took Ryan Griffen, the Tigers Richard Tambling and Buddy Franklin fell into the arms of Buckenara at No. 5.

It's been told before, but Buckenara had information Richmond wanted Tambling with No. 4, so he took Roughead first and crossed his fingers on Franklin.

"In doing our homework on the draft, we knew that Richmond had already invited Roughead and his family to their Sunday lunch after the draft," Buckenara recalled.

"They told him they were going to take him at No. 4.

"So if we were going to go Franklin at No. 2, we wouldn't have got Roughead, so we took a punt.

"We got the word that they (Richmond) had gone off Buddy a little bit and everyone was talking about us taking Richard Tambling.

"We were keen on him, too, but we decided to go Roughead at No. 2 and threw the cat among the pigeons.

"So we then felt they (Richmond) would take Tambling ahead of Franklin.

"We were always going to take the two best talls with our first two picks, and then we would take the next best midfielder at No. 7, and that was Jordan Lewis.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,24296090-19742,00.html

What a load of crap, that means they also were happy to let the Bulldogs pass him over too. Buckenara said immediately after the draft that they'd hoped that Tambling would fall through to them. If they were so certain on taking Franklin, why did they need to call for extra time and then almost call out the wrong name, needing to go back and correct themselves?

[Francois Jackson]

Crock of poohe. They lucked out on Buddy plain and simple. If they were so certain he would become the star he most certainly has they would have taken him with their first pick. All this rolling the dice rubbish sounds great in retrospect but everyone, inclusing Hawthorn, rated Bling over Buddy. It was a toss up between Tambling and Roughhead at the time, Franklin wasn't part of the equation.

I hate hearing this 'Drafting-Masterstroke' brought up. It's always sold as intentional but the truth be known the draft feel the way it did because no one rated Buddy above Lids, Bling, Roughhead or Griffin. In fact I remember hearing that experts were surprized that Buddy went as high as he did given his attitude and poor performance at the TAC Cup.

Let's write this article when we near the end of their careers and see where they all rate then.

Stripes

rubbish stripes.

our need at the time was for tall KPP.
one of roughy or buddy should have been on our radar, if we were smart.

if the shoe was on the other foot and we had buddy now, we would be laughing in their faces as they are to us today

[Ramps]

If we had taken franklin we wouldnt have Cotchin. You win some, you lose some, for me it will turn out even in the end, Tamblling is coming along, we will hopefully find afew more players that we need and then hopefully our midfield which will have Cotchin as key focus will come to the fore. 

[richmondrules]

Crock of poohe. They lucked out on Buddy plain and simple. If they were so certain he would become the star he most certainly has they would have taken him with their first pick. All this rolling the dice rubbish sounds great in retrospect but everyone, inclusing Hawthorn, rated Bling over Buddy. It was a toss up between Tambling and Roughhead at the time, Franklin wasn't part of the equation.

I hate hearing this 'Drafting-Masterstroke' brought up. It's always sold as intentional but the truth be known the draft feel the way it did because no one rated Buddy above Lids, Bling, Roughhead or Griffin. In fact I remember hearing that experts were surprized that Buddy went as high as he did given his attitude and poor performance at the TAC Cup.

Let's write this article when we near the end of their careers and see where they all rate then.

Stripes

rubbish stripes.

our need at the time was for tall KPP.
one of roughy or buddy should have been on our radar, if we were smart.

if the shoe was on the other foot and we had buddy now, we would be laughing in their faces as they are to us today

The point is daniel, the article is not talking about what we did, it's talking about what they did. But if you want to turn this into some sort of criticism of Richmond then go right ahead.

[Francois Jackson]

If we had taken franklin we wouldnt have Cotchin. You win some, you lose some, for me it will turn out even in the end, Tamblling is coming along, we will hopefully find afew more players that we need and then hopefully our midfield which will have Cotchin as key focus will come to the fore. 

fair point

[Francois Jackson]

Crock of poohe. They lucked out on Buddy plain and simple. If they were so certain he would become the star he most certainly has they would have taken him with their first pick. All this rolling the dice rubbish sounds great in retrospect but everyone, inclusing Hawthorn, rated Bling over Buddy. It was a toss up between Tambling and Roughhead at the time, Franklin wasn't part of the equation.

I hate hearing this 'Drafting-Masterstroke' brought up. It's always sold as intentional but the truth be known the draft feel the way it did because no one rated Buddy above Lids, Bling, Roughhead or Griffin. In fact I remember hearing that experts were surprized that Buddy went as high as he did given his attitude and poor performance at the TAC Cup.

Let's write this article when we near the end of their careers and see where they all rate then.

Stripes

rubbish stripes.

our need at the time was for tall KPP.
one of roughy or buddy should have been on our radar, if we were smart.

if the shoe was on the other foot and we had buddy now, we would be laughing in their faces as they are to us today

The point is daniel, the article is not talking about what we did, it's talking about what they did. But if you want to turn this into some sort of criticism of Richmond then go right ahead.

another example of a pathetic drafting choice the RFC made.
2 KPP players in this draft and we let them slip through our fingers

it would be the worst drafting error for the last 20 years. RFC and Buldogs should feel like  after watching buddy tonight.

its not tambling's fault but it should rest soley on that fwit Miller and his choices re: drafting

[WilliamPowell]

it would be the worst drafting error for the last 20 years. RFC and Buldogs should feel like  after watching buddy tonight.

its not tambling's fault but it should rest soley on that fwit Miller and his choices re: drafting

Don't forget that Hawthorn didn't take Buddy with their 1st pick - they took Roughead. Why?

Only reason I raise it is because not 2 but 3 clubs by passed Buddy Franklin with the first 4 picks of that draft.

Why? 

[3rogerd]

Crock of poohe. They lucked out on Buddy plain and simple. If they were so certain he would become the star he most certainly has they would have taken him with their first pick. All this rolling the dice rubbish sounds great in retrospect but everyone, inclusing Hawthorn, rated Bling over Buddy. It was a toss up between Tambling and Roughhead at the time, Franklin wasn't part of the equation.

I hate hearing this 'Drafting-Masterstroke' brought up. It's always sold as intentional but the truth be known the draft feel the way it did because no one rated Buddy above Lids, Bling, Roughhead or Griffin. In fact I remember hearing that experts were surprized that Buddy went as high as he did given his attitude and poor performance at the TAC Cup.

Let's write this article when we near the end of their careers and see where they all rate then.

Stripes

rubbish stripes.

our need at the time was for tall KPP.
one of roughy or buddy should have been on our radar, if we were smart.

if the shoe was on the other foot and we had buddy now, we would be laughing in their faces as they are to us today

The point is daniel, the article is not talking about what we did, it's talking about what they did. But if you want to turn this into some sort of criticism of Richmond then go right ahead.

another example of a pathetic drafting choice the RFC made.
2 KPP players in this draft and we let them slip through our fingers

it would be the worst drafting error for the last 20 years. RFC and Buldogs should feel like  after watching buddy tonight.

its not tambling's fault but it should rest soley on that fwit Miller and his choices re: drafting

let it go.

[Infamy]

its not tambling's fault but it should rest soley on that fwit Miller and his choices re: drafting

I hate to use facts to ruin a good rant, but Greg Beck was still in charge of recruitment for the 2004 draft

[Francois Jackson]

its not tambling's fault but it should rest soley on that fwit Miller and his choices re: drafting

I hate to use facts to ruin a good rant, but Greg Beck was still in charge of recruitment for the 2004 draft

really i didn't know.

point taken. I would like to know when its going to be our turn to laugh at other clubs for making the wrong decisions.
it seems we are always on the receiving end.

its not a rant i just think we should never trade away our picks. No Mundy, warnock, Mcmahon. It gets u nowhere.

the hawks traded very smart by getting their JON hay and thomo draft picks and have built their side around that.

At one stage i was keen for Kerr but i have turned a full circle. stuff him.

we need more quality players.

[WilliamPowell]

the hawks traded very smart by getting their JON hay and thomo draft picks and have built their side around that.

Agree with you there - they were very smart trades, especially the Jon Hay one and that isn't having a go at Jon Hay btw