Ruthless or reluctant? Time for the club to choose

[Baron Samedi]

I've been saying it for a while. Kingy (who I really like) said it today:

“So if they (trade Rioli, Baker, Bolton and maybe Martin), Richmond at the moment have got Pick 1 and 21. They would end up with something like 1, 7,8, 10, 13, 16, 20 and their own 21 and a future first coming in."

What do we lose? Some on-field leadership, for sure. But just look at what we gain. Our next flag kickstarted, right here, right now, in 2024.

We'd still have experience on every line -

Vlastuin, Broad, Short
Taranto, Hopper, Pickett
Lynch, Balta

Ruthless Richmond or Reluctant Richmond? Do we want to shake the competition down for everything it has to offer and say "we are faaaarking Richmond and won't be down for long" or do we bow our heads and disappear into the long night?

Let's *smile* go!

 

[AngryAnt]

I know you've been saying this for the past six years but this time you are right.

It's time to sell the farm - saddle up boys!!

 

[mrposhman]

Hang on, so we get 7, 8, 10, 13, 16, 20 and a future 1st for Rioli, Baker, Bolton and Martin? 7 1st rounders for them? I'd be surprised.

 

[Baron Samedi]

I know you've been saying this for the past six years but this time you are right.

It's time to sell the farm - saddle up boys!!

It's the inverse of my position in early 2017, when I thought the list had plenty of potential but had lost patience with Dimma

I've lost patience with this list of faded stars and battler kids.

 

[TigerForce]

Hang on, so we get 7, 8, 10, 13, 16, 20 and a future 1st for Rioli, Baker, Bolton and Martin? 7 1st rounders for them? I'd be surprised.

I heard it this morning, and I think Kingy's a bit in paradise on this happening. We already know Shai's staying and I'm sure Rioli won't go. I can also see the AholeFL somehow blocking this and other clubs complaining.

 

[Baron Samedi]

Hang on, so we get 7, 8, 10, 13, 16, 20 and a future 1st for Rioli, Baker, Bolton and Martin? 7 1st rounders for them? I'd be surprised.

they ran through the scenarios on SEN. Again, I really like Kingy but this is clearly a best-case scenario.

 

[Baron Samedi]

I heard it this morning, and I think Kingy's a bit in paradise on this happening. We already know Shai's staying and I'm sure Rioli won't go. I can also see the AholeFL somehow blocking this and other clubs complaining.

Shai wants to stay, which to me means nothing except a massive endorsement of Yze. Come trade period he will be front and centre I expect.

 

[TigerForce]

Shai wants to stay, which to me means nothing except a massive endorsement of Yze. Come trade period he will be front and centre I expect.

Can't see it happening. Great plan but can't see it happening. It might also pull us back a couple of years for entering finals again....unless we use some picks to trade ala 2016.

 

[tiger76]

I've said it before and will say it again...

 

[tigersnake]

I reckon its all a bit of a straw man, a false dichotomy. We're going to go hard this draft, its just a matter of how hard. This is a false dichotomy of nothing, or everything. Everyone staying or everyone going. Its simply not the case. We started the process with the in-draft trading last year. Bakes is gone IMO. Shai isn't IMO. Rioli is a maybe/ maybe not. We wouldn't get much, if anything for Dusty and I think he'll retire in any case so he's a moot point for this discussion. So IMO the discussion is really yes or no on trading Rioli bottom line.

We'll have a good draft hand, or a very good draft hand.

You need some good players regardless of your premiership window status, and going all-in on a single draft is not a percentage play in any case.

I'm surprised they haven't mentioned Lynchy. If I'm Collingwood or Melbourne I'm having a crack. Doug Wade says HTFAY?

 

[tiger76]

I reckon its all a bit of a straw man, a false dichotomy. We're going to go hard this draft, its just a matter of how hard. This is a false dichotomy of nothing, or everything. Everyone staying or everyone going. Its simply not the case. We started the process with the in-draft trading last year. Bakes is gone IMO. Shai isn't IMO. Rioli is a maybe/ maybe not. We wouldn't get much, if anything for Dusty and I think he'll retire in any case so he's a moot point for this discussion. So IMO the discussion is really yes or no on trading Rioli bottom line.

We'll have a good draft hand, or a very good draft hand.

I'm surprised they haven't mentioned Lynchy. If I'm Collingwood or Melbourne I'm having a crack.

This thread is not the place for balanced, measured thinking.

It's for dreams.

It's Powerball time in here; get on board.

 

[TigerMasochist]

I've been saying it for a while. Kingy (who I really like) said it today:

“So if they (trade Rioli, Baker, Bolton and maybe Martin), Richmond at the moment have got Pick 1 and 21. They would end up with something like 1, 7,8, 10, 13, 16, 20 and their own 21 and a future first coming in."

What do we lose? Some on-field leadership, for sure. But just look at what we gain. Our next flag kickstarted, right here, right now, in 2024.

We'd still have experience on every line -

Vlastuin, Broad, Short
Taranto, Hopper, Pickett
Lynch, Balta

Ruthless Richmond or Reluctant Richmond? Do we want to shake the competition down for everything it has to offer and say "we are faaaarking Richmond and won't be down for long" or do we bow our heads and disappear into the long night?

Let's *smile* go!

I'm guessing the idea would have to include us trading of some of our late points to a few F/S clubs. Reckon it's probably time for some decent scrubbing with the dunny brush and with such an even quality early draft with no standouts, it could be the perfect time to try to ream the first round.

 

[eZyT]

I vote half ruthless, if the price is right: half reluctant.

trading is all about extracting a high value.

So yeah if Bakes and Danny nets pick 3 and 7, yay.

if its pick 19 and 22, boo.

we'd need the keys to AFL house and a blank premiership cup and an engraver for me to sell $hai.

and if we sell dusty, RFC has one less member and lifelong lover. I'm Divorced.

the full ruthless scenario creates a list management bottleneck amidst a cultural wasteland.

unless you traded the 2024 super hand into 25 and 26 (just before Tassie)

you've got a problematically skewed list age profile and all that goes with that.

plus, too many first rounders in one year increases the likelihood of busts, as counter intuitive as that sounds - GWS and SUNS have had 48 TOP TEN picks through the Dustin Martin era. How's that worked out?

there is only so much talent on offer. if your panning a stream for gold, a gigantic gold pan wont guaranteed you riches

so, yeah, for me, steady as she goes middle road, rather than scorched earth.

I have a lot of lived experience as an all-or-nothing bloke, and believe me, the ALL is very, very, difficult to pull off

 

[AngryAnt]

It's the inverse of my position in early 2017, when I thought the list had plenty of potential but had lost patience with Dimma

I've lost patience with this list of faded stars and battler kids.

It's the inverse of my position in early 2017, when I thought the list had plenty of potential but had lost patience with Dimma

I've lost patience with this list of faded stars and battler kids.

Yeah. Was happy with the 4th flag tilt, but now that's done we need a higher quality of kids that we currently have.

Your picks returned is best case, but it still needs to be done.

 

[AngryAnt]

This thread is not the place for balanced, measured thinking.

It's for dreams.

It's Powerball time in here; get on board.

We won't trade all of them even if we wanted to - but I don't mind us trying.

 

[Baron Samedi]

I reckon its all a bit of a straw man, a false dichotomy. We're going to go hard this draft, its just a matter of how hard. This is a false dichotomy of nothing, or everything. Everyone staying or everyone going. Its simply not the case. We started the process with the in-draft trading last year. Bakes is gone IMO. Shai isn't IMO. Rioli is a maybe/ maybe not. We wouldn't get much, if anything for Dusty and I think he'll retire in any case so he's a moot point for this discussion. So IMO the discussion is really yes or no on trading Rioli bottom line.

We'll have a good draft hand, or a very good draft hand.

You need some good players regardless of your premiership window status, and going all-in on a single draft is not a percentage play in any case.

I'm surprised they haven't mentioned Lynchy. If I'm Collingwood or Melbourne I'm having a crack.

the problem with this thesis is that you're the one saying Baker, Bolton and Rioli are "everything"

which goes against your own argument.

the reality is that Baker, Bolton and Rioli are not "everything", they are a portion of our list we should trade off for a hell of a lot back in terms of draft capital. In essence this is about a new coach growing with a batch of raw talent.

 

[TigerForce]

We won't trade all of them even if we wanted to - but I don't mind us trying.

Agree. We just saw what Taranto's calling for this week.

 

[Baron Samedi]

who knows if Kingy's Powerball numbers come up?

Maybe. Probably not. I'm not here to convince on something rarely seen in footy.

What I am more certain about is that we NEED those numbers and more. Look at the list.

Those calling for softly, softly are in line for some disappointment. Years worth. The next North Melbourne.

Dimma already had a few keystones when he started but still only just scraped through in 2016, when those guys were entering their prime.

We need those faaaarking numbers to come up. Most of all Yze needs some of those numbers.

 

[tiger76]

We won't trade all of them even if we wanted to - but I don't mind us trying.

Bolton is the interesting one for me; I would have thought that if anyone was going to be looking over the fence it would have been him.

He's a striker, and they need service from a midfield. (And ours is running on fumes, or a least wind powered)

I'd be super interested to see what we could get for him to bolster our stocks more quickly.

One top 10 pick a year is too slow for my liking.

 

[tigersnake]

the problem with this thesis is that you're the one saying Baker, Bolton and Rioli are "everything"

which goes against your own argument.

the reality is that Baker, Bolton and Rioli are not "everything", they are a portion of our list we should trade off for a hell of a lot back in terms of draft capital.

We're talking across each other. For the purposes of this discussion, they are everything. Everything does not literally mean every player on the list.

If we didn't already have a good hand from last year and all the picks that come with finishing at the bottom, you'd have a point. (I think we currently have the most points by a fair way? Could be wrong but we have a lot). If we didn't know that we will be trading some players, and we will be, you'd have a point.

This is saying flog the lot, or we're weak as *smile*, which just isn't valid. Its silly tabloid sensationalism.

We'll get another good pick for Bakes, there will be another trade or 3, dunno who, some picks for points deals, we'll end up with a good hand in a good draft.