The Pros and Cons of Tanking (Merged)

[davidrodan]

Re: To win or not to win - Draft pics V late season wins

Cuttingly accurate.

Obviously Cameron hasn't been around long enough to realise that whilst we'll happily give over our picks for other clubs duds none will give up much if anything for our unwanted offcuts. It will be an effort to trade any of our players for picks this season before GC17. Good luck with that Craig.

CC is prolly hoping that that the other clubs will see the draft as 'weak' and hopefully will wanna trade picks

Personally, I think our only hope at trade week is getting to the swans table before anyone else

 

[Forever Hoping]

Re: To win or not to win - Draft pics V late season wins

If we can extract a 2nd rounder for either of these 2 id take it...Jackson and McGuane

Hopefully schulz isnt damaged goods and we can get a 3rd rounder for him...Port maybe "again" or Dogs or Sydney

I think we would be fooling ourselves to think that we would have any interest for Sarge. If he can't hold his spot at RFC in a year where we have been so bad, what does that say about his value. Put it this way - he will be uncontracted at the end of next year and GC can take him and the AFL would compensate us with a draft pick based on its assessment of his worth and they would allocate round 7 - pick 112!!!!

 

[AstuteTiger]

Re: To win or not to win - Draft pics V late season wins

Sarge. Put it this way - he will be uncontracted at the end of next year and GC can take him and the AFL would compensate us with a draft pick based on its assessment of his worth and they would allocate round 7 - pick 112!!!!

:rofl too true but im holding the belief that port who offered pic 28 two yrs ago can have *smile* being hopefully a 3rd rounder to any admirers....As Claw would say that offer from Port was light years ago the land scape has changed condiderably since that offer....Ahh yeah Sarge has gone backwards!

We can hope nontheless....

 

[the claw]

Re: To win or not to win - Draft pics V late season wins

I think we would be fooling ourselves to think that we would have any interest for Sarge. If he can't hold his spot at RFC in a year where we have been so bad, what does that say about his value. Put it this way - he will be uncontracted at the end of next year and GC can take him and the AFL would compensate us with a draft pick based on its assessment of his worth and they would allocate round 7 - pick 112!!!!

well take it we may need it.

 

[Al Bundy]

Re: To win or not to win - Draft pics V late season wins

Bookies have not been lisiting a price on us making the 8 for some weeks now. Go and get a quote on it.

No-one interested ! ;D

I still maintain we can make the finals.

Might be flying the lonely flag but the first piece of the puzzle came today Haw lost

We of course need to win every game & Port lose every game. Crazier things have happened ! ( WC won today against the Dogs !)

No team above us (Port, Ess, Haw or Syd) to win more than 9 games. We finish on 9.5 wins !

:gotigers

Rosy...join me in the view !

 

[Kahuna]

Re: To win or not to win - Draft pics V late season wins

I'm a big believer in winning games. The psychological effect of winning if far greater for the team than 'tanking' to get draft picks. A successful team doesn't necessarily have the best individual players, but it bonds together to play the best football.

 

[strachanie19]

Re: To win or not to win - Draft pics V late season wins

Pick 3 baby...it's looking good now!!! Especially with Mel v Freo and North v WCE next week.

 

[Danog]

Re: To win or not to win - Draft pics V late season wins

*smile* McMahon *smile* us over again. Why couldn't you miss that shot after the siren?

 

[dimmauchump]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

OK frawleydud. You want a response.

This is a contemptible proposal. I can't be bothered reading the thread. I'm sure others have dealt with it.

You want to corrupt the whole business of teaching young players how to win for a marginally better bit at the draft. Sorry, no way.

I remember the loss to the saints. Now I'm really angry that Wallace gave up. Cotchin!!
Winners never quit, and quitters never win. Sorry, but I prefer the former; and don't want to be associated with the latter. Where were those winner today???

Just thought i'd bring this topic back online after the fantastic football we have been playing these last 2 weeks. Wake up people the honeymoon period is over and reality has now set in. Nah stuff it, who needs Scully or extra quality picks in the draft. Lets finish 9th!!

 

[Streak]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

It didn't cost us Scully, it cost us a pick after the first round so using your 2007 analogy the win has cost us McMahon.

Whew!. I'd hate to make that mistake twice :hihi

 

[btoz_01]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

The way the Frockers are playing against the Powerless the Frockers are likely to win.
The Frockers also have a game against the DDD's they may also win.
So Id predict on current form we are a chance to finish 15th.

 

[Streak]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

Just thought i'd bring this topic back online after the fantastic football we have been playing these last 2 weeks. Wake up people the honeymoon period is over and reality has now set in. Nah stuff it, who needs Scully or extra quality picks in the draft. Lets finish 9th!!

Right now, we are looking a good chance to finish second last. I can't see us winning another game, so we will finish 3rd last at worst. What does that get us, pick 4?

I know we missed a priority pick, but with pick 4 we have to be able to get a very good player. I think you are over-reacting here a tad.

 

[the claw]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

With statements like the above - You are living up to your name!

Thank God you are not in the RFC Football Department is all I can say!..........

whys that tuck king mcmahon pattison are all glass half full players. to this stage of rances career we must have real concerns about rance and his kicking and decision making. the other concern is he is not playing on tall forwards either.

im one who liked rance as a junior i think he has a future but you just cant ignore his weaknesses and they are a concern.

this is just his second yr he has time on his side but sheesh we wanna hope he improves in those critical areas of his game.

 

[Streak]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

we must have real concerns about rance and his kicking and decision making. the other concern is he is not playing on tall forwards either.

im one who liked rance as a junior i think he has a future but you just cant ignore his weaknesses and they are a concern.

this is just his second yr he has time on his side but sheesh we wanna hope he improves in those critical areas of his game.

I agree Claw. I am not impressed that he isn't picking up tall forwards. Not sure what the deal is here. Would have thought that by now he was getting challenged by getting the sort of opponent I thought we drafted him to play on.

 

[the claw]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

The way the Frockers are playing against the Powerless the Frockers are likely to win.
The Frockers also have a game against the DDD's they may also win.
So Id predict on current form we are a chance to finish 15th.

lol we cant have that now can we. after all ferals only expected melb freo and wce to be in the running for the spoon.richmond we were sposed to be at least 9th placed :.
we lose to north and we lose to essendon and we get a crack at a real quality footballer at 3 and we get a crack at good kids at 18 and 20.
but it seems no one rates pick 18 and it seems all and sundry think we are not bottom 4. it seems we dont need a clean out and it seems we have the cattle capable of winning the flag.

when we finish at or near the bottom of the ladder next yr the same deluded fools will be singing the same song.
we dont need pps we just need the odd win against a fellow battler.
ive already said since 07 we should have had picks 2 18 19 and used them. 08 1 4 20 and this yr 09 1 3 19. it seems people dont think all these early picks would have helped us, fools to think that if you ask me. these picks would have been a true representation of where the list and club is at nothing more.

 

[Tiger74]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

lol we cant have that now can we. after all ferals only expected melb freo and wce to be in the running for the spoon.richmond we were sposed to be at least 9th placed :.
we lose to north and we lose to essendon and we get a crack at a real quality footballer at 3 and we get a crack at good kids at 18 and 20.
but it seems no one rates pick 18 and it seems all and sundry think we are not bottom 4. it seems we dont need a clean out and it seems we have the cattle capable of winning the flag.

when we finish at or near the bottom of the ladder next yr the same deluded fools will be singing the same song.
we dont need pps we just need the odd win against a fellow battler.
ive already said since 07 we should have had picks 2 18 19 and used them. 08 1 4 20 and this yr 09 1 3 19. it seems people dont think all these early picks would have helped us, fools to think that if you ask me. these picks would have been a true representation of where the list and club is at nothing more.

You still haven't explained how your "example to all" club in the West Coast Eagles has lost their priority pick. You ridiculed Richmond for not following their lead, but they are in exactly the same boat as us.

 

[the claw]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

You still haven't explained how your "example to all" club in the West Coast Eagles has lost their priority pick. You ridiculed Richmond for not following their lead, but they are in exactly the same boat as us.

not sure what your on about here. we arent wce and our situation and list is different.

they come from a base of premiership in 06. but even then in 06 they traded into earlier draft picks. just take a peek into what they have done you may be surprised. after a premiership they still utilised 16 29 43 and 50. 07 a yr they made the finals finishing 3rd on the ladder they ended up with picks 3 13 20 22 and virtually a pick 4 in kennedy. they traded away picks 30 and 35 for pick 22 because of salary cap issues. in 08 they had picks 2 18 20 36.

imo from where they were at late this season they would have been better of tanking and recieving picks 2 and 4. apart from this yr they have maximised the draft. worsfold has regularly said he basically thinks he has the cattle to climb into top 4 hence they dont have the need to tank in his opinion. another early pick this yr probably about pick 6 or 7 the trading of the likes of seaby hansen staker and they will pull in some more picks.

even in 05 a yr they finished runner up by a kick they traded into draft picks.

ive often said tanking is not just about pps to me it is part of an all out youth process prioritising as many early picks as you can get.

its about cleaning out sub standard players its abut early ops its about playing all of your kids if possible its about not playing players who are not going to be a part of your future even if they are a better option now. tanking is playing youth and if you win doing that so be it.

 

[Tiger74]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

not sure what your on about here. we arent wce and our situation and list is different.

you have been going on about how unprofessional Richmond is to win games, while the masters of the universe in the WCE know how to use the system correctly, and will tank to ensure they get the picks.

 

[the claw]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

you have been going on about how unprofessional Richmond is to win games, while the masters of the universe in the WCE know how to use the system correctly, and will tank to ensure they get the picks.

correct and yes ive stated wce should have gone after picks 2 and 4. its what i would have done.

imo they will turn over a lot of players this yr. fletcher wirrapanda hunter because of injury. staker, hansen, seaby, jones mcnamarra stenglein maybe waters wilkes. at least 8 will go better to do this with picks 2 4 20 36 52 than picks 7 24 42 58 64.

the latter was on target until 2 weeks ago.

in saying all this early in the season they lost 3 or 4 games they should have won if this had happened they would be in the mix well and truly for finals. the difference between them and us is they will be a genuine finals contender next yr where as we will still be wallowing near the bottom of the ladder. in a way they could afford to miss a pp we cant.

 

[Tiger74]

Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response

correct and yes ive stated wce should have gone after picks 2 and 4. its what i would have done.

imo they will turn over a lot of players this yr. fletcher wirrapanda hunter because of injury. staker, hansen, seaby, jones mcnamarra stenglein maybe waters wilkes. at least 8 will go better to do this with picks 2 4 20 36 52 than picks 7 24 42 58 64.

the latter was on target until 2 weeks ago.

in saying all this early in the season they lost 3 or 4 games they should have won if this had happened they would be in the mix well and truly for finals. the difference between them and us is they will be a genuine finals contender next yr where as we will still be wallowing near the bottom of the ladder. in a way they could afford to miss a pp we cant.

you still haven't explained how WCE managed to screw up their tank though. Does this mean they are no longer the example for us to follow?