The Lack of Talls on Our List (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.

The Lack of Talls on Our List (Merged)

Re: PSD pick 2?

GoodOne said:
If that's the case then the Tigers have it all upside down last couple of drafts we're we've used Pick1 and 2 last year and picks 2 and 3 this year on talls. We should have not recruited any and just left them for the late and rookie drafts. Obviously that is folly. I am very happy that we have used high picks for talls over the last 3 seasons or so. Very glad. The argument of some is that we should we should be drafting a few more at the lower picks to address our obvious lack of mature, quality talls. A little like the loading of midfielders from 2004 where we had a massive deficiency. No-one was saying in 2004 that we should be drafting flankers instead of midfielders because we are deficient in them too. Why? Because the midfielders are of most importance. Second come the KPPs. Flankers can be found alot easier.

Overall, pretty happy with the progress but desperately need to address all our key positions and ensure we have insurance for any that fail to mature and make it.

No where did i say that you cant use high draft picks on talls, if u can be bothered reading what i said was

Talls more so than other players can develop at different rates taking a few with these picks (Late ND,PSD and Rookie) gives u every chance you can stumble upon diamonds in the rough.

So yes sure talls with quality use the high picks if u feel they justify it. However keep looking for the one who develops late that wont cost you anything to draft.
 
Tango said:
the more you pick the more chance of finding a good one

...and the more you keep saying it, the more true it gets! :hihi

The more talls we pick regardless of how low they are rated, they greater chance we've got of bringing more duds into the club, leading to a slower rebuild, leading to more delisting in the near future, more picks being needed in the future, and the risk of our current batch of players getting too old before we unearth enough "hidden KPP superstars at picks 70+" :rofl

You are being logical - but only because you are leaving out pieces of the argument.
 
Re: PSD pick 2?

BangorTiger said:
No where did i say that you cant use high draft picks on talls, if u can be bothered reading what i said was

Talls more so than other players can develop at different rates taking a few with these picks (Late ND,PSD and Rookie) gives u every chance you can stumble upon diamonds in the rough.

So yes sure talls with quality use the high picks if u feel they justify it. However keep looking for the one who develops late that wont cost you anything to draft.

Well I did read your post. Unlike some, I don't usually reply without doing so. What you said with your first line:

'late ND picks, PSD and rookie draft picks is the place to gamble on talls.'

The implication is you shoudn't therefore gamble on talls with higher picks. But maybe I did read wrong. Maybe what you were really saying was that you can gamble with talls wherever they are picked in the draft.

Anyway, I agree with what you say. You are more likely to find a top pick in the tall department than a small. Smalls usually develop a lot more quickly and for many you have a reasonable idea of where they might progress to, whereas with talls it is littered with examples of players who were pretty ordinary as juniors but developed, once finished growing, into very good players. This is of course a generalisation but if you were a percentages person, you'd see this alot more with talls, especially the key position players.
 
players 191cm+ now are:

Astbury, David 195cm
Browne , Andrew 205cm
Gourdis, David 194cm
Graham, Angus 201cm
Griffiths, Ben 199cm
Grimes, Dylan 192cm
McGuane, Luke 191cm
Polak, Graham 194cm
Post, Jayden 194cm
Rance, Alex 193cm
Riewoldt, Jack 193cm
Simmonds, Troy 197cm
Thursfield, Will 191cm
Vickery, Tyrone 200cm
Westoff, Nick 198cm
 
Tiger74 said:
players 191cm+ now are:

Astbury, David 195cm
Browne , Andrew 205cm
Gourdis, David 194cm
Graham, Angus 201cm
Griffiths, Ben 199cm
Grimes, Dylan 192cm
McGuane, Luke 191cm
Polak, Graham 194cm
Post, Jayden 194cm
Rance, Alex 193cm
Riewoldt, Jack 193cm
Simmonds, Troy 197cm
Thursfield, Will 191cm
Vickery, Tyrone 200cm
Westoff, Nick 198cm

It would be nice to see the comparison, but I’d guess that puts us mid range in the AFL now, but with higher than average young talls
 
Tiger74 said:
players 191cm+ now are:

Astbury, David 195cm
Browne , Andrew 205cm
Gourdis, David 194cm
Graham, Angus 201cm
Griffiths, Ben 199cm
Grimes, Dylan 192cm
McGuane, Luke 191cm
Polak, Graham 194cm
Post, Jayden 194cm
Rance, Alex 193cm
Riewoldt, Jack 193cm
Simmonds, Troy 197cm
Thursfield, Will 191cm
Vickery, Tyrone 200cm
Westoff, Nick 198cm

Good enough for 2010.
 
Have certainly built up our giants (198cm+) list but still think we are light on key positions. As some say though you can't repair all the past damage in one season. Hopefully one or two of the lesser lights come good. Am just glad that we've finally bit the bullet and removed the deadwood and given other youngsters a go. The process has improved tremendously already.
 
Tango said:

Add in Moore who can play KPP despite being shorter and we now have 16 KPPs and rucks on our list which is considered reasonable. we probably could have done with another ruckman but its enough for next year when we can stock up on more KPPs types.

What do you say about Temel now that no club has picked him up across all 3 drafts?
 
I understand the drafting strategy now,

HB Farmer Contin
C Cousins Foley White
HF Gilligan Webberley Roberts
F Nahas Hicks Nason

DH wants a team he can look in the eye?
 
More likely he wants a team that can play AFL football at the highest level. Shame Temel isn't one of them.
 
Tango said:
I understand the drafting strategy now,

HB Farmer Contin
C Cousins Foley White
HF Gilligan Webberley Roberts
F Nahas Hicks Nason

DH wants a team he can look in the eye?
Give it a rest Tango. You have made your point numerous times.

To put your ridiculous post into perspective, through this draft alone (remember its our first draft under DH) we have built a potential spine of Grimes, Astbury, Martin, Griffiths and Westhoff.
 
u give it a rest, this is the lack of talls thread, created especially to discuss the fact that some believe we are short on talls - dont like the topic dont read the thread

regardless of who we picked, regardless of their skills or ability we are still short on talls on our list, the ones we do have are either too short, too skinny, too old, need development or lack class

i agree we have added more skilled players and thats great news, but this thread is about talls so go back to the back slapping, cheering smalls thread
 
Tango said:
we are still short on talls on our list, the ones we do have are either too short, too skinny, too old, need development or lack class

I thought that was to be expected when we're rebuilding. But tell me, which one of too short, skinny, old, need development or lack class do you but Griff in ?
 
We've got 15 on our list.

I thought at the start of the thread somewhere, you mentioned 16 would be a good base.
So we decided some of them weren't up to scratch and worth a spot on an AFL list.

HOLY CRAP!!!! We're 1 short of the 16 target. The sky is falling the sky is falling!
 
wrong, i said 20 given that we had so many kids, in a normal balanced squad i would say 18
15 is way too few given that there are only 4 that can play genuine KP at the moment (excluding rucks)
and 3 of them are undersized in thursty, riewoldt and mcguanne and the other is developing (Post)

i rate them as such
Astbury, David 195cm - good prospect but way too skinny and needs to play at coburg
Browne , Andrew 205cm - ruck but still a boy in a mans body - should make it - Ruck prospect
Gourdis, David 194cm - still developing and way to raw - coburg
Graham, Angus 201cm - great size ruck still learning - will make it - 1 st Ruck
Griffiths, Ben 199cm - kid, good size but still a boy - needs time
Grimes, Dylan 192cm - kid, needs time and will play at coburg
McGuane, Luke 191cm - undersized and punchs above his weight, good competitor, skills iffy - CHB
Polak, Graham 194cm - 3rd tall, good mark, cant play KP, poor skills, coburg at best
Post, Jayden 194cm - great prospect, can play CHF or CHB, still young but 1st 22
Rance, Alex 193cm - jury out, looks like tarzan plays like jane, should be KP but not yet - developing
Riewoldt, Jack 193cm - good player, our true hope in the fwd line - still undersized but FFWD
Simmonds, Troy 197cm - ageing ruck, cant play KP, too slow, cant kick more than 30 mtrs
Thursfield, Will 191cm - number 1 defender but still undersized, needs more weight - FBCK
Vickery, Tyrone 200cm - a developing ruck that can pinch hit FWD but needs the gym and time to develop - FP
Westoff, Nick 198cm - developing kid
 
Tango said:
u give it a rest, this is the lack of talls thread, created especially to discuss the fact that some believe we are short on talls - dont like the topic dont read the thread

regardless of who we picked, regardless of their skills or ability we are still short on talls on our list, the ones we do have are either too short, too skinny, too old, need development or lack class

i agree we have added more skilled players and thats great news, but this thread is about talls so go back to the back slapping, cheering smalls thread
This isnt the only thread that you have made reference to the lack of talls on our list so its a bit hard to avoid your repetitive posts.

And if you read my previous post the talls we drafted this year could potentially be our future spine in years to come. What more do you want?? Even a five year old would know that you cannot possibly draft 8 or 9 'talls' in the one draft.

You do realise that this isnt the last draft to be conducted in the AFL. There will be one next year.
 
Smoking Aces said:
You do realise that this isnt the last draft to be conducted in the AFL. There will be one next year.

Yeah there seems to be a brain fade in that area.