10,000,000 Cousins threads [Merged] | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

10,000,000 Cousins threads [Merged]

Will Ben Cousins Be Playing In The AFL Next Year?

  • Yes, At The Eagles

    Votes: 9 3.4%

  • Yes, At Another Club

    Votes: 92 35.0%

  • No

    Votes: 136 51.7%

  • Unsure

    Votes: 26 9.9%
  • Total voters
    263
You still have to put a team on the park. Griffiths was so fragile that any injury to Post/Reiwoldt would have made our forward line an utter joke. Not only that it would have meant robbing players like Astbury, Rance or Grimes of backline development to patch the holes.
 
Bill James said:
Given that you are incapable of being objective here is a complete list for a club you might be familiar with. These are the players drafted in the national or rookie drafts at greater than 20yo when we had the opportunity to draft an 18yo. To continue with the analogy we have gone the torp from 60 on the boundary 17 times for 1 goal (Tuck) 2 points (Nahas, King) and 14 OOB (the field). Better to haved kicked to the top of the square on every occasion and taken an 18yo IMHO. The number of kids taken after 50 in the draft who play more games than these blokes on average is large. Go and look. Taking 16 hacks to get a Shane Tuck does not make any sense or as history so clearly shows, a premiership list.

2000 - Stephen Sziller
2001 - Adam Houlihan
2002 - Tim Flemming Bill Nicholls Adam Pickering
2003 - Shane Morrison Shane Tuck
2004 - Mark Graham
2005 - Jeremy Humm
2006 - Jake King
2007 - Jarrond Sylvester Tristan Cartledge Cameron Howatt
2008 - Tom Hislop Robin Nahas
2009- Relton roberts
2010 - Brad Miller
Click to expand...

Nice little recent trip down memory lane there Bill. I assume Thomson and Cousins were included elsewhere.


SCOOP said:
Complete idiocy.
Click to expand...
Agree.

Harry said:
we are rebuild mode - why take the conservative route?
Click to expand...
With the risk of bringing brodders and baloo into the discussion - shortcut?

Talk of a lot of trading and McIntosh makes worry that more shortcuts are going to be taken.
 
Disco08 said:
I just can't see the logic in the shortcut argument. Can you explain it to me jimbob?
Click to expand...

Simply takes a spot for that could be used for a youngster and potential long termer that could be developed either at Richmond or at Coburg. Playing Miller is a means to win more games this year to the detriment of the long term. The excuses used by the club when drafting him were a furphy and Cameron and co. believed Miller could still play at the top level and would thus allow us to win more games this year.

Read mld's and Goodone's excellent posts on the topic.
 
Surely you don't believe that jimbob. You're just saying it to try and get a reaction, aren't you?
 
Disco08 said:
Surely you don't believe that jimbob.
Click to expand...
I don't want to but it is the most logical reason I can come up with for us taking Miller. Talk of insurance/coaching/structure is just nonsense.
 
If Miller had stayed in the team when Griff made it in I might have started to doubt my stance on Miller. For me, Miller's automatic exclusion the minute Griff is ready confirms that Miller was only there to keep the spot warm.

Post not getting a game had nothing to do with Miller.
 
jb03 said:
I don't want to but it is the most logical reason I can come up with for us taking Miller. Talk of insurance/coaching/structure is just nonsense.
Click to expand...

It's not logical at all mate. Hardwick's made it very clear they're focusing on development at this point. If they wanted him to improve the team's chances of making finals they would have put him on the main list and played him from round 1.

Why is insuring againt injury to young key position players nonsense?
 
Disco08 said:
It's not logical at all mate. Hardwick's made it very clear they're focusing on development at this point. If they wanted him to improve the team's chances of making finals they would have put him on the main list and played him from round 1.

Why is insuring againt injury to young key position players nonsense?
Click to expand...

IMO playing Miller for either Richmond or Coburg hinders development of the younger players and they practically promoted him immediately and did play him in the ones (from memory he only played one game for Coburg before promotion and playing for the ones).

Having Miller as back up should a key position player go down with injury is also pointless. We won't have him when we are supposedly challenging and there are plenty of other youngsters or youngsters who could fill the breach (even if not to the same capacity at this stage of their careers). Even some of their more senior players like Morton or even Tuck could do it.

We will have to agree to disagree because I will never be satisfied, agree to or understand the drafting of Miller (Pia jokes aside).
 
I didn't have much time for the insurance and coaching Coburg claims and always expected us to play Brad in the seniors. I expected he'd be better performed. Averaging 10 possessions and under a goal a game I think is disappointing. Maybe my expectations were a bit high.
 
Miller has to be getting a game for team structure reasons. There is surely no other explanation, although I believe he is also a good onfield leader but I am not sure if we have seen umuch evidence of that.

Once big Ben is back in action proper, I expect Miller might be gone from the senior team.
 
jb03 said:
With the risk of bringing brodders and baloo into the discussion - shortcut?
Click to expand...

shortcut? someone say shortcut??

totally agree. the only reason miller has been played is because they thought his dominating performances at CHF would lead us to the finals.
 
Streak said:
Miller has to be getting a game for team structure reasons. There is surely no other explanation, although I believe he is also a good onfield leader but I am not sure if we have seen umuch evidence of that.

Once big Ben is back in action proper, I expect Miller might be gone from the senior team.
Click to expand...

Ben is back in action and Miller is gone from the senior team Streaker.
 
Looks like Benny is gonna do an "Aker"/"Carey" now ..... gotta love these blokes making these Cameo's, what has the world come too ?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/romsey-plans-to-fly-ben-cousins-in-by-helicopter-for-comeback-game-in-country-league/story-e6frf7jo-1226094747336
 
I can't see that anyone else has posted this.

Cuz was admitted to hospital today for a infected leg from a cut. No doubt the media will blow this out of proportion purely because he went to hospital.
 
New York Tiger said:
Hi Bill - Hope you read the book. The biggest lesson i got from Moneyball was the use of statistical analysis to find the hidden worth of a player regardless of age or physical attribute. Using the Oakland A's as the example they focused on key role players to get to their 90+ wins. How else would you explain them picking up David Justice?

Back to footy, in general I agree with you re Hislop. However, maybe the recruiters saw some extra value in his inside work. IMO throwing the words Moneyball and Age together does not make sense.
Click to expand...
Sort of agree with you on age but only for estabished players. The probability of a 20yo (non ruck) who has not made established himself in the AFL coming good in a second club is so low it is better to take any draft pick under 50 instead. AFL is a little different to Baseball.
 
Re: Cousins in Hospital

I can hear Carlo putting her next piece together now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
< R8 the other games. | Changes v #lolNorf >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom