One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: mightytiges on October 04, 2009, 03:19:42 PM

Title: Our tall stocks
Post by: mightytiges on October 04, 2009, 03:19:42 PM
Quote
"We think we did a fair bit of planning last year with our forwards, we took Jayden Post (No. 26) and Ty Vickery (No.8 ) with our first and second picks," Jackson said.

"By taking them that put us in a good position with our talls. It (key position) is certainly something we will look to bolster but we are confident they (Post and Vickery) are going to be good players."
???

I believe FJ is deluding himself if he thinks we are in a good position with our talls. Forgetting about quality for the moment  :help and just talking numbers on our list - we are about to lose Richo, Simmo, Polak, Schulz, Hughes, Silvester and Gourdis within a year. Patto and Putt may be gone as well.

That leaves ....

Def: Thursty, McGuane, Rance, Moore
For: Riewoldt, Post
Rucks: Vickery, Graham, Browne

If just 9 talls going forward with GC17 and WS hogging the next 3 drafts is classed as a good position then I'll go he.   
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Francois Jackson on October 04, 2009, 04:26:22 PM
Francis Jackson has proved time and time again he has no idea and this is another example.

lets just forget about the tall KPP shall we Francis

he is in another planet if he thinks his job is done in the tall KPP department with Post and Vickery.



Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Smokey on October 04, 2009, 05:31:00 PM
Quote
"We think we did a fair bit of planning last year with our forwards, we took Jayden Post (No. 26) and Ty Vickery (No.8 ) with our first and second picks," Jackson said.

"By taking them that put us in a good position with our talls. It (key position) is certainly something we will look to bolster but we are confident they (Post and Vickery) are going to be good players."
???

I believe FJ is deluding himself if he thinks we are in a good position with our talls. Forgetting about quality for the moment  :help and just talking numbers on our list - we are about to lose Richo, Simmo, Polak, Schulz, Hughes, Silvester and Gourdis within a year. Patto and Putt may be gone as well.

That leaves ....

Def: Thursty, McGuane, Rance, Moore
For: Riewoldt, Post
Rucks: Vickery, Graham, Browne

If just 9 talls going forward with GC17 and WS hogging the next 3 drafts is classed as a good position then I'll go he.   

I reckon we will pick one up with our 2nd or 3rd pick and maybe another one in the rookie draft.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: mightytiges on October 04, 2009, 07:58:31 PM
I reckon we will pick one up with our 2nd or 3rd pick and maybe another one in the rookie draft.
I think we will too smokey but the concern is the quality of the KPPs available in the 2nd and 3rd rounds of the draft when we have the chance to select the best KPP at pick 3. No doubt the spin will be that we got a KPP we considered top 10 at pick 19.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: peggles on October 04, 2009, 10:36:33 PM
even if we don't get a good kpp with our 2nd or 3rd round pick.  we can still get another next year even if GC is supposed to dominate the draft.  if we get wooden spoon we'd have pick 4.  bound to be able to pick up a good tall. 
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Mr Magic on October 05, 2009, 02:37:03 AM
if we get wooden spoon we'd have pick 4. 

If? I reckon we're a near certainty.
Tragic situation when you head into a coming season feeling more confident about your spoon chances than playing finals, let alone a premiership.

Re the talls we have currently, agreed MT we need more, more & more.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: peggles on October 05, 2009, 07:26:01 AM
if we get wooden spoon we'd have pick 4. 

If? I reckon we're a near certainty.
Tragic situation when you head into a coming season feeling more confident about your spoon chances than playing finals, let alone a premiership.

Re the talls we have currently, agreed MT we need more, more & more.


well great then if we're certainties for the spoon.  we needn't worry about not being able to secure a class tall then.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Smokey on October 05, 2009, 09:21:53 AM
I reckon we will pick one up with our 2nd or 3rd pick and maybe another one in the rookie draft.
I think we will too smokey but the concern is the quality of the KPPs available in the 2nd and 3rd rounds of the draft when we have the chance to select the best KPP at pick 3. No doubt the spin will be that we got a KPP we considered top 10 at pick 19.

What it boils down to with me MT is that I don't like taking risks with KPP's and I see Pick #3 for a KPP as too risky.  If we take one of Scully, Trengove or Martin with that pick we are guaranteed (as best you can be) of having a very good footballer in what I consider the critical position of the midfield.  KPP's tend to be more hit and miss, probably because there are not as many of them available each year and I think you are nearly as likely to pick up a good one with a later pick.  I am of the belief that premierships are built around winning midfields and that you can have average to good KPP's who are made better by a 'Rolls Royce' midfield.  Conversely, an average midfield will never ever ever win you a premiership, even with the best KPP's going around.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Ramps on October 05, 2009, 01:17:31 PM
I was really looking for Griffiths or Black. I dont rate Temel. Temel is a VFL standard player. Problem is Black went really at Draft camp and I cant see him lasting till 19. Griffiths will probably be gone by then as well.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: tigersalive on October 05, 2009, 05:00:06 PM
I was really looking for Griffiths or Black. I dont rate Temel. Temel is a VFL standard player. Problem is Black went really at Draft camp and I cant see him lasting till 19. Griffiths will probably be gone by then as well.

Carlisle?
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Ramps on October 05, 2009, 07:17:58 PM
Carlisle is also a good option but my opinion- not that I would know more than anyone else is that he seemed more of KP Defensive player. Im looking for us to get a key forward and thats where I was hoping for Griffiths or Black. Black has come from the clouds. He was little known 2 months ago.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Judge Roughneck on October 05, 2009, 07:59:26 PM
Post looks like a defender to me. Not a key forward.

Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Infamy on October 05, 2009, 09:32:43 PM
Post looks like a defender to me. Not a key forward.
Based on what? His U18 year?
At AFL level he looks far more comfortable as a forward and looked lost in defence
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: the claw on October 05, 2009, 10:21:04 PM

Quote
"We think we did a fair bit of planning last year with our forwards, we took Jayden Post (No. 26) and Ty Vickery (No.8 ) with our first and second picks," Jackson said.

"By taking them that put us in a good position with our talls. It (key position) is certainly something we will look to bolster but we are confident they (Post and Vickery) are going to be good players."
???

I believe FJ is deluding himself if he thinks we are in a good position with our talls. Forgetting about quality for the moment  :help and just talking numbers on our list - we are about to lose Richo, Simmo, Polak, Schulz, Hughes, Silvester and Gourdis within a year. Patto and Putt may be gone as well.

That leaves ....

Def: Thursty, McGuane, Rance, Moore
For: Riewoldt, Post
Rucks: Vickery, Graham, Browne

If just 9 talls going forward with GC17 and WS hogging the next 3 drafts is classed as a good position then I'll go he.  

agree very silly statement from jackson. and its worse than you say. moore is not a kp mcguane and graham are not up to afl standard and browne is a rookie who has a long long way to go.

post while taken to play kpf is more likely a kpd.  vickery sheesh i thought he was a ruckman what jackson is doing lumping him in as a permanent forward is bewildering.

ive done this before and will do it again. look at the structure of the majority of sides on any given game day.
it usually goes

b/           *****       genuine big bodied kpd.      *****
hb/        *****          genuine big bodied  kd.      third tall
c/          *****               *****                     *****
hf/         ******        genuine marking chf         *****
f/          *****             genuine ff                     third tall
r/          ruckman        ******                         ******
int        ruckman         *****   *****      possibly tall running  utility       

yep most clubs will take 8 talls into games each week and more if you have a tall like corey who plays as a mid but structurally 8 is normally it.

in moving forward we dont have enough for decent structure  it is a disgrace.

the ideal is cover for each position so you would have 6 tall defenders 4 of which are capable of playing kp and holding their own. ditto for tall forwards and 4 ruckmen.  of course you will have roughly 10 at or close to afl standard the rest should be in various stages of development.
it also goes to say if you need 16 who you are reasonably sure can play at afl level and will become afl standard you will have to load up with surplus talls we all know every pick we take wont make it the fail rate for clubs is somewhere between 30 and 40 percent.

the amount of work that has to be done in this area is staggering.

having said this in no way should we waste pick 3 by targeting a tall with it who is not best available.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Dogga on October 05, 2009, 10:33:37 PM
Post looks like a defender to me. Not a key forward.
Based on what? His U18 year?
At AFL level he looks far more comfortable as a forward and looked lost in defence

I agree, Post looked much more comfortable as a forward. I think he has a little bit of that X factor that will make him an exciting player for us.  :thumbsup
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Judge Roughneck on September 17, 2010, 10:52:05 AM
How many talls will we take this year?

Current stocks:

Moore. Mcgaune. Riewoldt. Thursfield. Graham. Rance. Vickery. Astbury. Post. Browne. Griffiths. Gourdis. Grimes. Westhoff.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: tdy on September 18, 2010, 10:24:34 AM
How many talls will we take this year?

Current stocks:

Moore. Mcgaune. Riewoldt. Thursfield. Graham. Rance. Vickery. Astbury. Post. Browne. Griffiths. Gourdis. Grimes. Westhoff.

I would not be surprised if we traded away one or two of our existing talls for picks.

And I reckon we will take another ruckman and replace the talls we trade away.

Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: TigerLand on September 18, 2010, 12:32:58 PM
A thing not many people realise since Sandilands plays on the other side of the continent but Sandi didn't debut until he was 21 years old. Cox was much older maybe 24 (To be confirmed) Any criticsm of ruckman pre 21 not being AFL standard is a waste of time..

History stats like this give a good indication that you persist with our young ruckman Browne and Vickery.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: tdy on September 18, 2010, 12:37:22 PM
A thing not many people realise since Sandilands plays on the other side of the continent but Sandi didn't debut until he was 21 years old. Cox was much older maybe 24 (To be confirmed) Any criticsm of ruckman pre 21 not being AFL standard is a waste of time..

History stats like this give a good indication that you persist with our young ruckman Browne and Vickery.

Your quite correct in that Rucks dont peak until 24.  Still you usually have a good idea before then if you want to keep them.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Owl on September 19, 2010, 09:17:42 AM
nah I reckon bout 23 or 25 personally.  Surely where not taking another ruck...  I can imagine a tall back / forward maybe..  We have enough rucks to work with imo.  They need time on the job now.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Judge Roughneck on September 19, 2010, 12:16:30 PM
I would like two Rucks taken both in the rookie draft

1 australian kid 200cm
1 project African/eastern European
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Owl on September 20, 2010, 09:21:38 AM
tidyman ya didn't bite!
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Infamy on September 20, 2010, 06:18:35 PM
I would like two Rucks taken both in the rookie draft

1 australian kid 200cm
1 project African/eastern European
I don't see the point, they all have to play for the same reserves team and we don't have the room on our list, or spots in the sides to develop so many ruckmen around the same age at once. Better to have a range of ruckmen of varying age and stages of development.
Interstate sides can farm all their ruckmen out to multiple local state league teams, where as Victorian clubs have their ruckmen only play with their affiliated side.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Judge Roughneck on September 22, 2010, 12:53:02 PM
Collingwood Have two 204cm ruckman on the rookie list. One 20 the other 25 and one from America.

Plus wood, brown, Fraser all backing up number 1 ruckman jolly.

Apart from post we only have 3 real ruck options in vickery, browne, Graham all of whom are under 23 yoa.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Infamy on September 22, 2010, 03:18:00 PM
Collingwood Have two 204cm ruckman on the rookie list. One 20 the other 25 and one from America.

Plus wood, brown, Fraser all backing up number 1 ruckman jolly.

Apart from post we only have 3 real ruck options in vickery, browne, Graham all of whom are under 23 yoa.
You've just highlighted my point perfectly
Collingwood have a variety of ruckman at different stages of development, all ours are under 23 years of age and that's only Graham, the next oldest is 20 (21 if you include Post)
By having most of their ruckmen at senior age it gives the younger rookies a chance to play a lot of game time in the ruck at VFL level. Ours can't do this as their spots are taken by the kids we are trying to fast track. Another 2 rookies under 21 years of age will just have them floundering at VFL reserves and a glut of players in front of them for an elevation to VFL seniors.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Judge Roughneck on September 22, 2010, 03:41:35 PM
Collingwood Have two 204cm ruckman on the rookie list. One 20 the other 25 and one from America.

Plus wood, brown, Fraser all backing up number 1 ruckman jolly.

Apart from post we only have 3 real ruck options in vickery, browne, Graham all of whom are under 23 yoa.
You've just highlighted my point perfectly
Collingwood have a variety of ruckman at different stages of development, all ours are under 23 years of age and that's only Graham, the next oldest is 20 (21 if you include Post)
By having most of their ruckmen at senior age it gives the younger rookies a chance to play a lot of game time in the ruck at VFL level. Ours can't do this as their spots are taken by the kids we are trying to fast track. Another 2 rookies under 21 years of age will just have them floundering at VFL reserves and a glut of players in front of them for an elevation to VFL seniors.


richmond are shyte and collingwood are playing in the gf this week.

having 25 yoa, 29 yoa, 32 yoa ruckman going to do RFC any good?
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: tony_montana on September 22, 2010, 03:54:04 PM
I would play Vickery as a more permanent forward next season with short stints in the ruck like we did with Ottens, therefore I think we should be looking at a mature age mid 20's state league warrior type ruckman to shore up any potential holes in case of injury. That way it doesn't get too crowded between the 4 of them in our senior and coburg sides and they all get significant game time

I hope we can trade out 2 of McGuane/Moore/Thursfield/Rance and pump games into Gourdis, Astbury, Griffiths, Post, Rance(if he stays) Grimes and Vickery. Think we will have a much clearer picture of where we stand with most of these guys after another preseason and season of development.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Infamy on September 22, 2010, 05:25:52 PM
Collingwood Have two 204cm ruckman on the rookie list. One 20 the other 25 and one from America.

Plus wood, brown, Fraser all backing up number 1 ruckman jolly.

Apart from post we only have 3 real ruck options in vickery, browne, Graham all of whom are under 23 yoa.
You've just highlighted my point perfectly
Collingwood have a variety of ruckman at different stages of development, all ours are under 23 years of age and that's only Graham, the next oldest is 20 (21 if you include Post)
By having most of their ruckmen at senior age it gives the younger rookies a chance to play a lot of game time in the ruck at VFL level. Ours can't do this as their spots are taken by the kids we are trying to fast track. Another 2 rookies under 21 years of age will just have them floundering at VFL reserves and a glut of players in front of them for an elevation to VFL seniors.


richmond are shyte and collingwood are playing in the gf this week.

having 25 yoa, 29 yoa, 32 yoa ruckman going to do RFC any good?
Where did I say we should get ruckmen of that age. I'm simply highlighting how Collingwood having these more mature ruckmen makes it easy for them to carry some young rucks on their rookie list. We don't have that luxury yet while all our rucks are still the same age as the juniors we'd be drafting. If there is one worth taking then do it, but don't take 2 young rucks just for the sake of it. It's about having balanced list management.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Judge Roughneck on September 24, 2010, 11:04:52 PM
Scott Lycett (Port Adelaide Magpies, SA)
Height: 202cm, Weight: 95kg, DOB: 26/09/92
Strong-marking ruckman who is agile and super competitive. Team-oriented player who impressed with South Australia at under-18 level, averaging 17 hit-outs, 12 disposals and three marks.
Daniel Gorringe (Norwood, SA)
Height: 200cm, Weight: 92kg, DOB: 02/06/92
Gifted in the art of ruck work and a very athletic player who is strong overhead and dangerous near goal. Won All-Australian under-18 honours in 2010 averaging 21 hit-outs and 10 disposals.
Pat McCarthy (Glenelg, SA)
Height: 194cm, Weight: 84kg, DOB: 11/03/92
Pat is an athletic tall defender who can also go forward. He is a neat disposer of the ball and provides good rebound from defence. He won All-Australian under-18 honours this year where he averaged 17 disposals at 70 per cent efficiency.
Max Otten (Oakleigh Chargers, Vic)
Height: 193cm, Weight: 86kg, DOB: 10/11/92
Max is a left-footed tall defender who reads the game very well and makes good decisions with the ball. He provides good run from defence and played for Vic Metro in the under-18 championships.

Seb Tape (Glenelg, SA)
Height: 191cm, Weight: 85kg, DOB: 06/08/92
Seb is an athletic tall defender with excellent closing speed and a competitive edge. He is very good one on one and below his knees. He captained South Australia in the under-18 championships this year.

Matthew Watson (Calder Cannons, Vic)
Height: 195cm, Weight: 98kg, DOB: 16/07/92
Matthew is a left-footed tall defender with a penetrating kick and is strong in the air. He is composed with the ball in his hands and had a consistent under-18 championships, winning All-Australian honours and averaging 19 disposals and five marks.
Lucas Cook (North Ballarat, Vic)
Height: 194cm, Weight: 82kg, DOB: 3/3/92
Lucas is a tall forward who reads the game well and has sure hands.  He is a mobile player who can go back and makes good decisions.  He received Under-18 All Australian honours in 2010 and averaged 14 disposals and kicked nine goals at the Under-18 Championships.

Jack Darling (West Perth, WA)
Height: 191cm, Weight: 94kg, DOB: 16/6/92
Jack is an athletic tall forward who attacks the ball with ferocity and is strong overhead. He provides excellent defensive pressure in the forward 50.  He was named in the Under-18 All Australian team in 2009 and again provided an excellent marking target up forward for Western Australia in 2010.

Sam Day (Sturt, SA)
Height: 195cm, Weight: 94kg, DOB: 6/9/92
Sam is a high-leaping tall forward who can take contested marks and is skilful on the right and left side. He represented South Australia at the under-18 championships in 2010, winning All Australian honours.
Tom Lynch (Dandenong Stingrays, Vic)
Height: 196cm, Weight: 90kg, DOB: 31/10/92
Tom is a strong marking tall forward with terrific work-rate and ability at ground level.  He was impressive for Vic Country in Under-18 championships, where he averaged 13 disposals and four marks.

Luke Mitchell (Calder Cannons, Vic)
Height: 196cm, Weight: 96kg, DOB: 28/2/92
Luke is a tall forward/defender with strong contested marking ability. He is dangerous around goals and presents well on the lead. He missed the under-18 championships due to shoulder surgery but is now back in the TAC Cup.
Jake Von Bertouch (Woodville West Torrens, SA)
Height: 192cm, Weight: 80kg, DOB: 4/5/92
Jake is a tall forward who is quick on the lead and accurate in front of goal. He has strong hands and is team orientated. He represented South Australia in the under-18 championships this year.
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: tiger till i die on September 25, 2010, 12:27:38 AM
Jack Darling (West Perth, WA)
ALL THE WAYY :pray

But Tape looks like a good pick   :yep
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: tony_montana on September 25, 2010, 01:21:55 AM
Jack Darling (West Perth, WA)
ALL THE WAYY :pray

But Tape looks like a good pick   :yep

reckon Darling will slip with the head injury, Lynch has gone past him on that shaky indefineable called "more upside" imo. clubs are suckers for it

agree on Tape -btw not sure if anyone has asked, but is this Tape related to the late Jamie Tape?
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: tiger till i die on September 25, 2010, 01:43:52 AM
Jack Darling (West Perth, WA)
ALL THE WAYY :pray

But Tape looks like a good pick   :yep

reckon Darling will slip, Lynch has gone past him imo

agree on Tape -btw not sure if anyone has asked, but is this Tape related to the late Jamie Tape?
wouldnt have a clue... but if we can trade a player or two can we get both?
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Judge Roughneck on August 27, 2013, 01:42:21 PM

Quote
"We think we did a fair bit of planning last year with our forwards, we took Jayden Post (No. 26) and Ty Vickery (No.8 ) with our first and second picks," Jackson said.

"By taking them that put us in a good position with our talls. It (key position) is certainly something we will look to bolster but we are confident they (Post and Vickery) are going to be good players."
???

I believe FJ is deluding himself if he thinks we are in a good position with our talls. Forgetting about quality for the moment  :help and just talking numbers on our list - we are about to lose Richo, Simmo, Polak, Schulz, Hughes, Silvester and Gourdis within a year. Patto and Putt may be gone as well.

That leaves ....

Def: Thursty, McGuane, Rance, Moore
For: Riewoldt, Post
Rucks: Vickery, Graham, Browne

If just 9 talls going forward with GC17 and WS hogging the next 3 drafts is classed as a good position then I'll go he.   

agree very silly statement from jackson. and its worse than you say. moore is not a kp mcguane and graham are not up to afl standard and browne is a rookie who has a long long way to go.

post while taken to play kpf is more likely a kpd.  vickery sheepoohought he was a ruckman what jackson is doing lumping him in as a permanent forward is bewildering.

ive done this before and will do it again. look at the structure of the majority of sides on any given game day.
it usually goes

b/           *****       genuine big bodied kpd.      *****
hb/        *****          genuine big bodied  kd.      third tall
c/          *****               *****                     *****
hf/         ******        genuine marking chf         *****
f/          *****             genuine ff                     third tall
r/          ruckman        ******                         ******
int        ruckman         *****   *****      possibly tall running  utility       

yep most clubs will take 8 talls into games each week and more if you have a tall like corey who plays as a mid but structurally 8 is normally it.

in moving forward we dont have enough for decent structure  it is a disgrace.

the ideal is cover for each position so you would have 6 tall defenders 4 of which are capable of playing kp and holding their own. ditto for tall forwards and 4 ruckmen.  of course you will have roughly 10 at or close to afl standard the rest should be in various stages of development.
it also goes to say if you need 16 who you are reasonably sure can play at afl level and will become afl standard you will have to load up with surplus talls we all know every pick we take wont make it the fail rate for clubs is somewhere between 30 and 40 percent.

the amount of work that has to be done in this area is staggering.

having said this in no way should we waste pick 3 by targeting a tall with it who is not best available.


genuine big bodied kpd. - 18 Alex Rance   194   96
genuine big bodied  kd. -       25 Troy Chaplin   195   99   23.02.86
third tall - 2 Dylan Grimes   193   88   16.07.91
genuine marking chf -     29 Ty Vickery   200   97   31.05.90 
genuine ff -    8 Jack Riewoldt   195   94   31.10.88                 
third tall -  27 Aaron Edwards   184   93   02.03.84 / 16 Luke McGuane   192   92   12.02.87
 ruckman -       20 Ivan Maric   200   102   04.01.86




What are you thought on how things have panned out if we fast forward to today? Given the way the rules have changed its unusual to carry a second ruckman and a 'back up' swing man type tall. Most teams play about three talls at each end of the ground and a single ruckman, usually supported by a tall forward. Hence allowing for as many smalls and mids to be 'runners', used in midfield rotation.     

In reserve we have Mcbean who will hopefully take over the troublesome third forward spot. Derickx and Orren [ruck depth], Griffiths and Elton [forward], Astbury, McIntosh and Darrou.


Code: [Select]
b/           *****       genuine big bodied kpd.      *****
hb/        *****          genuine big bodied  kd.      third tall
c/          *****               *****                     *****
hf/         ******        genuine marking chf         *****
f/          *****             genuine ff                     third tall
r/          ruckman        ******                         ******
int        ruckman         *****   *****      possibly tall running  utility     
 


Morris. Chaplin. Vlastuin.
Houli. Rance. Grimes.
Conca. Cotchin. White.
Shane Edwards. Vickery. Ellis.
Newman. Riewoldt. McGaune/Aaron Edwards.
Maric. Deledio. Martin.
Jackson. Grigg. King.
Foley.



Dea. Astbury. Bachelor.
Petterd. McIntosh. Darrou.
Nahas. Tuck. Helbig.
Lonergan. Elton. Knights.
Ohanlon Griffiths. McBean.
Derickx. Mcdonough. Arnot.
Orren. Williams. Simon. Verrier 
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Yeahright on August 27, 2013, 01:56:44 PM
It (key position) is certainly something we will look to bolster but we are confident they (Post and Vickery) are going to be good players." [Quote from Jackson]

 :lol
Title: Re: Our tall stocks
Post by: Judge Roughneck on August 27, 2013, 01:59:03 PM
Griffiths and Elton are both highly rated, high draft pick key forwards. They might bust like Post but as least we have some promising kids  :cheers
I cant remember a time when we have some promising blokes in the seniors who are youngish and playing KP, and some even younger also promising KP types playing 2's. The list is a more healthy position than 5-10 years ago. [  http://oneeyed-richmond.com/forum/index.php?topic=10515.msg171726#msg171726  ]



National   1   3      Dustin Martin   Richmond   84
National   2   19      Benjamin Griffiths   Richmond   19
 National   3   35      David Astbury   Richmond   29
 National   3   44      Matthew Dea   Richmond   24

National   1   15      Brandon Ellis   Richmond   40
National   1   26      Todd Elton   Richmond   1
 National   3   55      Matthew Arnot   Richmond   4
 Pre-Season   1   9      Brett O'Hanlon   Richmond   8


National   1   9      Nick Vlastuin   Richmond   16
National   2   31      Kamdyn Mcintosh   Richmond   0
 National   2   33      Liam Mcbean   Richmond   0

 National   2   42      Matthew Mcdonough   Richmond   1