What!! An AFL football club forum proposing one sided trades in it's favour.... Never!
-
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.
Welcome to the Tigers Jacob Hopper
- Thread starter tigerman
- Start date
What!! An AFL football club forum proposing one sided trades in it's favour.... Never!
Agree, imagine getting both Mitchell and Crouch and adding them to Prestia and Graham in a 4 X 100M relay leg, they wouldn't medal at the Senior Olympics!!
Let's be honest, picks beyond 30 have a 20% chance to play 100 games. It's not rocket science that the picks before are statically where the talent is. It's not a secret sauce recipe.
Those before 30 have a 32% chance of 100 games.
Those before 30 have a 32% chance of 100 games.
Interesting perspective back in July. https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/te...p/news-story/30529709fee90c5a0558fd2dd01dcaf9
The biggest issue is these blokes are coming from a soulless club where the culture is not akin to the RFC, they will be expected to buy in lock stock and barrel.
If they buy in wholly and solely then it will be a win for the RFC.
If they dont and we sell the farm, then the criticism will come.
FWIW I think they will buy in; they will be looking for success now, and they won't know themselves after they walk into one of the biggest clubs in the land with a rich history a defined culture and the most passionate and rabid Tiger Army at their back.
What a jolt is going to be in store for these lads, should they both make it to Punt Road!!
They do come from a soulless club in the sense of fans and crowds but I reckon the playing group at gws would be pretty tight and supporgive
ha ha
“If I’m Collingwood, I’m trying to package up my first-round pick this year to get both Hill and Taranto through the door.
“Taranto and Hopper would free up, let’s call it $1.5 million. Hill and Bruhn add a little bit to that so let’s call it $2 million”
The Magpies’ first-round pick currently sits at pick 14, while Richmond (pick 11), Geelong (pick 18)
So ……..
Pick 14 gets Taranto and Hill back then while Taranto on his own has now gone up to 2 first rounders…….. I suppose you have to start asking a high price to begin with …….
ha ha
Our list profile right now is out of sync. Our biggest hole is players in that are in that 24-27 age bracket. To win a premiership you need all age brackets covered. Bringing in Taranto and Hopper solves that. Plus the fact they are quality players. These additions all of a sudden give us the list profile you need to win premierships. Yes they won’t come cheap. But we are in the business of winning premierships.
And high quality people according to my mail. Like with Tarrant, the arms will be around them
This. But I’d think we have done our due diligence and wouldn’t go after them if they wouldn’t buy in?
The thing for me is, other than Cameron maybe, has any decent GWS player left and become a better player?
Everyone is making a big deal about players leaving them, but they have been rewarded very well for anyone who has left.
Treloar was for 2 first rounders? They should have found better than Treloar or at least collectively with both picks: Treloar is no superstar.
Shiel was traded for pick 8 and future 9 from memory? He’s fairly average and that’s a good return for him if they picked the right guys.
Very good point
But looking at both Taranto & Hopper who have been in the AFL system for 6/7 years they have not set a foot wrong and have been of impeccable character and talent as well as leadership. They are also big game players that are consistently playing at a high level.
Both players are very good clearance players but are different types and have different skill sets , They offer variety to what we have and also provide richmond to play players like short , pickett , baker , bolton and Dusty more freedom to play outside of packs where they can be more damaging and also more foward options.
I dont really see much of a problem with the 7 year contracts and both players will likely complete and extend after the 7 years
hopper will be playing his last year as a 32 year old and looking at the league with this type of talent they usually play past that age and $700k-$750k is probably around 100k more than what we would consider a great price but lets not forget they are giving up free agency and would attract atleast the same if not more
They both have been consistently reliable and high end performers now for long enough to justify these deals and its a great opportunity for Richmond to fill our biggest weakness in 1 hit.
Somebody mentioned above that only 32% of picks below 30 make it to 100 games and i would say its even less for picks between 10-30 and would likely be below 25% so taking this into consideration our 4 picks 12,19,30,F1 will most likely produce 1 very good player and 1 average player but they wont be at that level for 2-3 years by which time we could no longer be in our window and possibly lose players because of that.
My valuation of these 2 players are Taranto pick #6-#10 Hopper #8-#12
Picks #6 + #10 =3146 points (tarranto & Hopper)
Picks #13 + #17 +#22 + #33 = 3654 (taken into account our picks dropping lower due to bids etc)
I think anything better than all our picks going out with 2 later picks coming back 40+ is a reasonable trade for 2 players our list is desperate for and 7-9 year players
Well said. They may not be perfect but they're as close to a sure thing as you'll get (compared to draft picks) and fill a chasm in our age demographic. This isn't a game of perfect. Buying players cheats the system, because it leans in your favor due to the will of the players themselves. It may not always work out, but then neither does the draft.
Are Hopper and Taranto exactly what we need? Do they provided perfect value? No. But they're what we can get, and I still like the odds.
I hope that makes sense!
The Corrupt AFL will be pulling the strings in the background, trying to bend the Tigers over and get as much as possible.
CHANCES OF DRAFTING A 200-GAMER (based on 1993-2008 drafts)
Pick 1-2: 69 per cent
Pick 3-5: 38 per cent
Pick 6-10: 28 per cent
Pick 11-20: 27 per cent
Pick 21-30: 13 per cent
Pick 31-50: 15 per cent
This is what the data says about the values of draft picks. There are some shortcomings, but it still acts as a guide. More often that not, if you make assumptions about data it will bite you on the arse, but I reckon the odds would have improved since 2008 as recruiting and drafting has got more pro, say 10-15%? But thats only a guess, it may have improved more, it may be the same.
So lets say there is a 3 to 1 shot of drafting a 200 gamer, or high quality player, with a pick pick from 6 to 20. Noise says we'll pay 4 picks between 10 and 21. If we kept those picks and used them we'd raft 1.3 high quality players for 200 games, or 270 high quality games.
If we do the trade we get 2 high quality players for 100 games each, or 200 games (probably closer to 220-240 but I'm being conservative). Factoring in the value of known quantities, and where our list is at, age and competitiveness-wise, I say do it, no brainer for me. But I can see why draft devotees are questioning it. When you crunch the numbers, 4 late first round picks is a good price IMO. If I was GWS I'd want a top 10 pick in that mix, but they have to understand what is possible.
Pick 1-2: 69 per cent
Pick 3-5: 38 per cent
Pick 6-10: 28 per cent
Pick 11-20: 27 per cent
Pick 21-30: 13 per cent
Pick 31-50: 15 per cent
This is what the data says about the values of draft picks. There are some shortcomings, but it still acts as a guide. More often that not, if you make assumptions about data it will bite you on the arse, but I reckon the odds would have improved since 2008 as recruiting and drafting has got more pro, say 10-15%? But thats only a guess, it may have improved more, it may be the same.
So lets say there is a 3 to 1 shot of drafting a 200 gamer, or high quality player, with a pick pick from 6 to 20. Noise says we'll pay 4 picks between 10 and 21. If we kept those picks and used them we'd raft 1.3 high quality players for 200 games, or 270 high quality games.
If we do the trade we get 2 high quality players for 100 games each, or 200 games (probably closer to 220-240 but I'm being conservative). Factoring in the value of known quantities, and where our list is at, age and competitiveness-wise, I say do it, no brainer for me. But I can see why draft devotees are questioning it. When you crunch the numbers, 4 late first round picks is a good price IMO. If I was GWS I'd want a top 10 pick in that mix, but they have to understand what is possible.
Last edited:
We might have to sue them for damages over the ARC farce then. Andrew Dillion wasn't in the meeting for fun yesterday it was to ensure Scott didn't admit fault that would expose them to legal action.
