One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on April 27, 2024, 10:38:09 AM
-
CORNES AND KING DISCUSS THE NEXT STEPS IN RICHMOND’S REBUILD
Lachlan Geleit
SEN
26 April 2024
What is Richmond’s next step in their rebuild?
That was the question on the mind of Kane Cornes and SEN Breakfast co-host David King after the Tigers slumped to 1-6 after their 42-85 loss to Melbourne on Anzac Eve.
While Richmond tried to rebuild on the run following their premiership successes by adding the likes of Tim Taranto and Jacob Hopper via trade, both Cornes and King think that the club now needs to hit the pointy end of the draft hard to acquire top-level young talent.
The duo discussed how Richmond does that and the futures of out-of-contract utility Liam Baker, free agent Dustin Martin and other ways that they could manoeuvre to get those picks, including trading players that hold value.
Cornes thinks that the Tigers can no longer look at their list as a short-term proposition and should instead look at five years down the line when they may enter premiership contention again.
Cornes: “What do you do? … Can you finish as low as possible without suggesting that you're gonna tank to try and get a pick one or two?
“That's the discussions that Richmond now must have, don't they?”
King: “You can't have this discussion in hindsight. So what do you do? This is the old discussion.
“So everyone says, ‘Oh, you know Sam Mitchell cut too hard. This is going to be a 10-year rebuild’. Others say, ‘Oh, Adam Simpson is too loyal to these older blokes and should have got second-round picks for them’.
“So, what do you do?”
Cornes: “Well, the first point is Liam Baker will make his call. So that will be taken out of their hands.
“If he wants to go, he'll go. You offer him the contract. Clearly, you would love to keep him … but he's going to make that call.
“So then you do the best that you possibly can out of that (if he leaves).
“The Dustin Martin one is the really interesting one. He doesn't look as motivated as he has been in the past.
“You want to be really clear with him, ‘Are you prepared to put yourself through another pre-season and play in a side that is essentially rebuilding?’. Or, ‘Is this the right time to have the biggest victory lap you can have? Play your game 300, we’ll send you off in the way that you deserve to be sent off’. That's what I would be doing with Dustin.
“Is he helping them? Is he a Dyson Heppell type that you want in there showing leadership, rocking up to training, giving it absolutely everything, and setting a great example for all these young players that are going to be there?
“You've got to ask him that.”
King: “All that might be correct.
“But how do they get the glut of first-round picks that are needed? The absolute high-end first-round picks that are needed to give you any chance of coming out of a rebuild phase.”
Cornes: “So you look at who's got currency and who is potentially going to give you that. Dan Rioli has been spoken about - is he one that's going to give you a first-round pick? You have to look at that.
“You maximise what you can get for Baker. West Coast and Fremantle are stacked with picks.
“We don't need to be seeing (Marlion) Pickett and (Nathan) Broad and these players getting games over young players … like why are you playing Sam Naismith over Tyler Sonsie?
“That's just bizarre to me.”
King: “Let's talk about the rebuild phase, which I think is the toughest phase of the lot, how do you actually set for a rebuild? Do you purge rather than support?”
Cornes: “I'd purge as much as you can because you've got to look at it as a five to six-year window.
“It's not, ‘How do we get better?’, that’s not the discussion for Richmond.
“It’s, ‘We win four games this year, we get a top pick, then we trade a couple out, we get more picks and then you build and you play those games together over a five-year period’, that's the discussion they need to have.
“It's not going to be a rebound quickly up the ladder for Richmond … it’s going to be punishing.
“All Richmond fans can cop it because they've had the success and everyone would love to be in their position that they've seen that success in the last seven years it's been a great ride for them.
“Now it's about a bit of pain and enduring that.”
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2024/04/26/cornes-and-king-discuss-the-next-steps-in-richmonds-rebuild/
-
like why are you playing Sam Naismith over Tyler Sonsie?
great call
-
like why are you playing Sam Naismith over Tyler Sonsie?
great call
Maybe because all our talls are injured?
Question should have been why are you playing Naismith over Ryan? That would actually make sense Corn.
-
He makes plenty of good points.
Only thing I would disagree with is trading D Rioli and I'm happy for broad to be in the side at the moment.
I'd be looking to trade Short and Graham. Baker if the right deal comes along.
Dusty looks finished to me.
Dusty, Lynch, Prestia, Grimes, Pickett, KMac, Broad all likely finished by the end of '25 so we are looking at $4.5mil cap space over two years.
Time to load up on picks and find 2 gun FAs.
-
like why are you playing Sam Naismith over Tyler Sonsie?
great call
Maybe because all our talls are injured?
Question should have been why are you playing Naismith over Ryan? That would actually make sense Corn.
:clapping
Asking why a 206cm ruckman is playing ahead of a 181cm mid/HF is a silly question.
-
a 206 cm ruckman that is passed his use by date.
Not that stupid actually. Gawn dominated with 2 ruckman, and by some margin as well may i add.
Sonsie should have played with his form especially. Kane is spot on.
-
LMAO at posters acknowledging what a known richmond troll is saying about our list rebuild. Why don’t you wipe his bum too ya pack of sycophants! :lol
-
like why are you playing Sam Naismith over Tyler Sonsie?
great call
Maybe because all our talls are injured?
Question should have been why are you playing Naismith over Ryan? That would actually make sense Corn.
:clapping
Asking why a 206cm ruckman is playing ahead of a 181cm mid/HF is a silly question.
Nank has gone largely solo against Gawn in the past with someone like Balta to relieve when Gawn isn't rucking and he's been serviceable.
The problem was that Naismith was probably always going to be useless unless he was rucking.
Should have played Ryan or just conceded the ruck when Nank was resting and played another mid.
-
a 206 cm ruckman that is passed his use by date.
Not that stupid actually. Gawn dominated with 2 ruckman, and by some margin as well may i add.
Sonsie should have played with his form especially. Kane is spot on.
If Cornes had asked why is Pickett or McIntosh playing ahead of Sonsie, then I'd say he's right
-
like why are you playing Sam Naismith over Tyler Sonsie?
great call
Maybe because all our talls are injured?
Question should have been why are you playing Naismith over Ryan? That would actually make sense Corn.
I agree but disagree. Yep our talls are injured or been badly out of form. Why not take it to the next step and play both Ryan as a permanent fwd and Naismith as the ruck fwd.What does it matter at this stage.
The one who is being over looked is Kaleb Smith.
-
im in the same boat as most here and thought both Sonsie and McAuliffe should have got another game and in their right positions with good game time.
Im gunna play devils advocate here.
When you look at the three games Sonsie got then there was a strong case for him to be dropped. While he did some nice things he didnt exactly set the world on fire. still he should have got one more.
The question has to be when will they give him a mid role that seems to be where he thrives. Surely he has to be a better option than Graham and a few others in that role..
McAuliffe again he showed the odd great glimpse with limited game time the trouble is he has not played much footy. came on as sub against the Saints and basically got a half against wce in a game we got badly beaten up in the midfield. Was a good opportunity to play him and Hopper in tandem imo. When Hopper went off we at least would have had a big body in there.
The two things that stick out to me is its obvious even our young bulls need big bodies to help them in games.
The other thing is he has not had a lot of game time since the start of the season. it makes no sense having dropped him if he is not injured to then rest him from the vfl.
On losing Hopper why not give Lefau a run thru the middle.
The one im more disappointed with is when Short got injured we had Kaleb Smith playing real well and he was an obvious like for like replacement across hb. Looks to have had another good game this week as well.
Big critic of Ryan will reserve comment on him until after he plays more senior games. Ludicrous given our tall situation that good vfl games were not rewarded with a recall.
Another week where all we can kick is 5 goals we need to do something different.
-
Wished Browny punched him in the head a bit harder
-
King and Cornes do not have Richmonds best interest at heart , they would be happy to see us as cellar dwellers for the next 30 years. To trade a good player who’s open to staying for a draft pick is a gamble , the list of duds our club has recruited in the last 20 years is amazing , it’s hard to get a good one, even with all the research they put in.
I still remember when we had 5 picks in the first 20 picks , mmm how did that work out,
-
You still need a core of top 10 picks to win flags - we had Cotchin (2), Martin(3) Vlastuin (9) ..got lucky that Riewoldt (12) & Rance (18) slid ...even the blokes we traded for were top 10 picks (Prestia & Caddy) and another in Lynch that like Riewoldt & Rance was a slider that would be rated top 5 if his draft was held again.....either they all went first round or end of first priority pick In Rance's case.....bottom line you need to draft & recruit the top line talent and you increase your chances the more high picks you have... :shh
-
And that core need to be evenly spread across the ground. What makes Carlton so strong is that exact recipe couple with some clever trade/free agency selections. Gibcus, Balta and Taranto are an okay start…
-
Balta and Taranto yes. Balta belongs down back IMO.
Gibcus a no at this stage unless his body comes good.
I think Young is serviceable tbh, astbury MK2.
Brown looks good.
Lefau at best will be a 2nd or 3rd tall option.
So we really need 2 key forwards and probably another defender then 3-4 kids. Hopefully McAuliffe is one of those.
-
Young could be like astbury if he had rance along side him or even a prime grimes, but he doesn’t and the team defense is poor too so he gets found out a lot.
Definitely need atleast 1 key forward, hopefully Fawcett comes along nicely.
Interesting watching Geelong on the weekend, they still have a core unit of older guys. They just seem to be able to find gems in the draft who have developed really well.
Getting Cameron and Dangerfield in free agency changed everything for them, but if we were able to do something similar, who’s to say we can’t bounce back quickly. We will get a top 4 pick this year, hopefully another 2 or 3 first rounders.
Thing is we still need to attract guys in the right age bracket through free agency
-
Astbury is so far out of Young's league it's not funny. Astbury at his best was a quality defender with a reliable pair of hands and decent disposal. Young is none of those things
-
Astbury is so far out of Young's league it's not funny. Astbury at his best was a quality defender with a reliable pair of hands and decent disposal. Young is none of those things
Astbury was ordinary for a long time and IMO was always suspect by foot.
Young has played what 25 games? He looked good to me vs Dees.
If Balta can be the new Rance and Brown can be the new Grimes I see a spot for Young.
-
Astbury is so far out of Young's league it's not funny. Astbury at his best was a quality defender with a reliable pair of hands and decent disposal. Young is none of those things
Agree. Not hating on Youngy but he's a long way off that level.
Astbury was underated for mine.
-
People moan about Young but I'm not sure why. He is very good one on one, strong overhead as a marking interceptor, excellent with a spoil & generally defends very well. He's still only 25 & has work to do on his strength & size, can't wait for him to bulk up & start pushing a few forwards around. We moan about defenders who can't defend, but when we get one who is good at just that we find other thing to moan about instead.
I'll bet he is pretty weak at trigonometry too ... :o
-
Young's a VFL level footballer who's been found out big time this year.... :shh
-
He has shown a bit in the last year or so but when the pressure is truly on I reckon he's been proven to be pretty ordinary. Handy depth but our current list situation basically has him playing by default
-
Astbury is so far out of Young's league it's not funny. Astbury at his best was a quality defender with a reliable pair of hands and decent disposal. Young is none of those things
Astbury was ordinary for a long time and IMO was always suspect by foot.
Young has played what 25 games? He looked good to me vs Dees.
If Balta can be the new Rance and Brown can be the new Grimes I see a spot for Young.
Astbury was plagued by injury in the early part of his career. He turned into a very good defender. He was a good mark, was very good one on one and had decent disposal.
-
Astbury is so far out of Young's league it's not funny. Astbury at his best was a quality defender with a reliable pair of hands and decent disposal. Young is none of those things
Astbury at his worst was indecisive and rubbish.
-
Astbury is so far out of Young's league it's not funny. Astbury at his best was a quality defender with a reliable pair of hands and decent disposal. Young is none of those things
Astbury at his worst was indecisive and rubbish.
And a triple premiership player & life member.
-
Astbury is so far out of Young's league it's not funny. Astbury at his best was a quality defender with a reliable pair of hands and decent disposal. Young is none of those things
Astbury at his worst was indecisive and rubbish.
And a triple premiership player & life member.
So's Castagna for whom indecisive & rubbish was the default setting.... :shh
-
Question i ask is how long before we can legitimately contend again. Lets say the consensus is 5 years.
Most likely in 5 years time the following will be gone for sure if not earlier. they all are already at least 30 or turn 30 this year.
Pickett, Broad, McIntosh, Vlastuin, Grimes, Prestia, Martin, Lynch, Naismith, Nankervis.
Add to that the following will be at the back end of their careers if still there.
Short 33, Hopper 32, Rioli 32, Graham 31, Taranto 31, Baker 31, Bolton 30, Young 30, Lefau 30.
Then we have those who are just not good enough who are younger and are likely to be gone and there's a few.
If 2029 is top 4 and challenging then the amount of work that needs to be done is monumental. I think 5 years is being unrealistic.