The Tigers' last 5 drafts, as a team

[Stripes]

G'day bigtone. Well spoken and some very good arguments. Welcome to the board.

I think WP is referring to the meeting he attending before the draft that year. The club also had had Cotch down at the club, just like Vickery for that matter, and knew his strengths as a player and as a person well before the draft which was why they would have taken him over Kruezer regardless.

I can see your point regarding 'needs choices/decisions' regarding ruck options but the club rates Putt and Gus quite highly so Vickery was chosen this year as  much for his forwardline potential as for insurance in case the other two don't make it. The club was quoted stating that you can usually get a quality ruckman with a later choice and that few rucks chosen early in the draft have become stars so if they had a choice over a potential star midfielder/KPP or a ruckman they would choose the first option. This is why Vickery was a clever choice because he filled both categories - KPP and ruck.

In regards to your belief that TW has not created a worthwhile list - you are not alone on this board. There are plenty of poster that share your view, some quite vocally  I can see your reasoning but I don't think the club should be that harsh or reactive. I believe the list is a strong one which continues to increase in depth and quality every year. This year for example we drafted for need and potential, and were able to top up with class which we have not had the luxury of doing for years.

The sheer amount of quality midfielders we have coming through is astounding. Our backling is class with players such as Rance, Raines, Hislop and even Post all creating pressure on places. Our forwardline is also filled with potential but still remains a work in progress. This is why players such as Vickery, Gourdis, Nahas etc will add pressure on Riewoldt, Hughes, Morton, Brown for places this year in the F50. By year's end the forwardline will be stabilised like our backline.

Our ruck options remain the most concerning but yet again there is now depth there. Yes they need to develop but we are preparing and planning for Simmonds eventual retirement which is good list management.

My question to you , besides the odd bad draft choice or trade which every club makes, how could our recruiters and TW have done a better job with our list?

Regardless big tone, great to have you posting.

Stripes

[Chuck17]

Also i think in the backs of their minds they would have been thinking they didn't want to make the same mistake they had made in the '04 draft and taken a small on-baller over a big strong KKP/Ruck and the out and out favourite number 1 draft pick.

Hi Big Tone,

As Stripes said welcome.

I dont subscribe to the 04 draft being a mistake theory.  At the '04 draft time the drafting needs of us and the Hawks were different, we had no developing midfield while Hawthorn had a young talented emerging midfield.  We also had Richo as a KPP forward and had drafted Simmo (although I dont know if that was a done deal before the national draft), we clearly needed the best available midfielders.

The RFC recruited on needs and in Lids case got best available as well IMO.  As far as Im concerned Tambling could still be the better footballer, I will need to see the two Hawks 04 draftees perform at a high level for a number of years before I believe a judgement can be made on that, I also believe Tambo has to be allowed to develop before he can be judged fairly.

[Judge Roughneck]

Hi WP,

It's very easy for these recruiters to say after the draft who they would have chosen, but at the time Kruz was without doubt
the outright favourite to go number 1 by most, if not all clubs. That fact that we so desperately needed a ruckmen to help Simo (like we still do) and the fact that we had struggled so badly when Simo was injured, i think that we would have had to have taken Kruz. Also i think in the backs of their minds they would have been thinking they didn't want to make the same mistake they had made in the '04 draft and taken a small on-baller over a big strong KKP/Ruck and the out and out favourite number 1 draft pick.
So that brings me to a question for you, IF Rich had have fallen through to us at pick 8, would we have taken him or still gone with Vickery to suit our needs??

Cheers

Says who? WCE would have taken Cotchin with #1. I don't see why we would not have either. He is at the club now so its a null point. Getting Kruzer would have not been the end of the world. I don't think its important the manner in which Cotch came to the club or situations if we had pick #1. Cotch was rated as a potential Gary Ablett / Judd like prospect. I doubt we would have overlooked him even if Kruz was still around.

The rucks stocks with Simmonds / Pattison and the developing Putt / Vickery / Graham / Browne now look solid.

If Rich is such a gem why did so many clubs over look him?

[Chuck17]

If Rich is such a gem why did so many clubs over look him?

Tell you what though the Bomber fans aren't happy that their club didn't pick up Rich though.  However they're not in a position to know the full story on the recruiting decisions and to top it off they are not that bright anyway.

[Judge Roughneck]

We were happy to overlook man-boy Hurn, and got JON instead ( )

I don't see why would not have taken Vickery ahead of Rich if he were still around.

[WilliamPowell]

It's very easy for these recruiters to say after the draft who they would have chosen, but at the time Kruz was without doubt
the outright favourite to go number 1 by most, if not all clubs. That fact that we so desperately needed a ruckmen to help Simo (like we still do) and the fact that we had struggled so badly when Simo was injured, i think that we would have had to have taken Kruz.

I honestly believe they would have taken Cotchin with pick 1 if we had it. I remember sitting at the pre-draft night they had in 2007 and when they were speaking about the 3 top picks they kept refering to Cotchin as "the one"

So that brings me to a question for you, IF Rich had have fallen through to us at pick 8, would we have taken him or still gone with Vickery to suit our needs??

I think they would have still gone with Vickery, they have and had huge "raps" on him and I think they view him as better player. The one I think they would have gone for ahead of Vickery if he'd slipped through to pick 8 was Hammish Hartlett.

[Judge Roughneck]

It's very easy for these recruiters to say after the draft who they would have chosen, but at the time Kruz was without doubt
the outright favourite to go number 1 by most, if not all clubs. That fact that we so desperately needed a ruckmen to help Simo (like we still do) and the fact that we had struggled so badly when Simo was injured, i think that we would have had to have taken Kruz.

I honestly believe they would have taken Cotchin with pick 1 if we had it. I remember sitting at the pre-draft night they had in 2007 and when they were speaking about the 3 top picks they kept refering to Cotchin as "the one"

So that brings me to a question for you, IF Rich had have fallen through to us at pick 8, would we have taken him or still gone with Vickery to suit our needs??

I think they would have still gone with Vickery, they have and had huge "raps" on him and I think they view him as better player. The one I think they would have gone for ahead of Vickery if he'd slipped through to pick 8 was Hammish Hartlett.

Who was the 3rd of the top 3?

Morton, I assume?

[WilliamPowell]

Who was the 3rd of the top 3?

Morton, I assume?

yep Cale Morton

[big tone]

Hi Stripes,

In regards to Cotch, fair enough and i'm so glad they got that right. He is an out and out superstar for mine and i just like the way he has gone about it since he has been at our club. Even the way he and a few others did that extra work in the off season shows this kid is the real deal and he know what it takes to become a very good player for us.

Now to answer your question, the only way you can judge the recruiters is on their draft selections, and as you said they don't always get it right and the lower the pick the harder it is to find good players. I understand all that. So the way they could have done a better job is by recruiting better players with the draft picks that didn't work.
And just remember us and Hawthorn were at the same stage when TW took over, he even said that he chose us to coach over Hawthorn because he thought we had the better list at the time. Now these were his words and nobody elses. So i think the draft decisions they have made compared to us has been a lot better over the time TW has been at Richmond.
Agree or disagree the proof is in the pudding.

[big tone]

Hey there C17,

With all due respect Chuck, blind freddy can see that Buddy Love not only is, and will be a far better player than Tambling and one of the greats of all time.  I like Richie and I think he can be a valuable player for our club but if we had to choose again, I'm pretty sure we would do it differently.  I know you said you would like time to be able to judge between the two, but as of now its pretty clear.
In regards to Lids, I was completely happy with taking him at #1 over Buddy. 
Don't get me wrong, and I'm not trying to be negative, I'm only stating my opinion on this topic.

Cheers

[Stripes]

Regarding Hawthorn and Richmonds rebuilding starting point I would ahve to disagree that we were at the same stage when TW took over. If TW did say that we had the better list over Hawthorn when he took over I feel it was merely an excuse to ease his old clubs disappointment for not securing him when he made his final club decision. Quite amusing in retrospect.

When TW took over Hawthorn was well into their rebuilding. They had already assembled a strong midfield unit of quality youth lead by their number one draft pick Hodge. Just as we did in 2007, they slipped back to the bottom of the ladder with their inexperienced list in 2004 and had the luxury of being able to select based on need/talent with the knowledge their midfield stocks were already excellent.

In the 2004 draft we needed to build our midfield from the ground up just as Hawthorn had done 3 years earlier. We now have excellent midfield prospects, just as they did, and have used the last few drafts to fills needs as well as to find talent. This years draft was clear indicator of this with the choice of a Ruckman/KPP, crumbers, forward/defender untility and two mature (but still young) in and under types.

We would never have drafted Cousins if we had not already covered all areas across the ground for the future. Some of these choices may not develop but we have given ourselves every chance to succeed by ticking all the boxes.


So I have to disagree with your statement about the development of Hawthorns and Richmonds lists. They are more advanced than ours by 3/4+ years at the least, just as Carlton is 2 years behind us. Hawthorn just lucked out with a few choices such as Buddy who every team thought had a terrible attitude, possible drug issues and was inconsistent.

Even Hawthorn chose Roughhead before him so sometimes you just luck out and advances your team further than you possible expected. Now if we can just luck out with a few of our speculative choices i think this would only be fair....

Stripes

[1965]

Hey there C17,

With all due respect Chuck, blind freddy can see that Buddy Love not only is, and will be a far better player than Tambling and one of the greats of all time. 

Cheers

Depends on whether he can continue to behave himself.

 

[Beren]

Hey there C17,

With all due respect Chuck, blind freddy can see that Buddy Love not only is, and will be a far better player than Tambling and one of the greats of all time. 

We shall see.
I think Hawthorn will slip back a tad next season too.

[Infamy]

Hey there C17,

With all due respect Chuck, blind freddy can see that Buddy Love not only is, and will be a far better player than Tambling and one of the greats of all time. 

Cheers

Depends on whether he can continue to behave himself.

 

He definitely isn't doing that
Shame there isn't a hotline you can call with info

[Chuck17]

He definitely isn't doing that
Shame there isn't a hotline you can call with info

Yes that persistent rumour is doing the rounds again isnt it