Who would you pick at No 9?

[Tigerfan]

The club will say we had 4 guys down for pick 9 and they all slid down to our choices

 

[Tigers of Old]

Is Wines any chance to be there at 9?

 

[Herr_Tiger]

Grundy would be my first choice and Macrae if he's gone. After that probably Vlastuin.

Agree

 

[ToraToraTora]

I don't know much about this whole caper, but when you get rid of a mature ruckman, and when one of the best junior ruck talents for years is available, don't you draft him? Don't you? Surely Grundy will be gone by pick 3.

 

[tigergollywog]

I don't know much about this whole caper, but when you get rid of a mature ruckman, and when one of the best junior ruck talents for years is available, don't you draft him? Don't you? Surely Grundy will be gone by pick 3.

I reckon hell be gone, but if hes not and we pick a 185cm back flanker, they'lle have to escort me from the GC convention centre.

 

[tigs2010]

I reckon hell be gone, but if hes not and we pick a 185cm back flanker, they'lle have to escort me from the GC convention centre.

What back flanker?

 

[tigergollywog]

What back flanker?

any back flanker. Grundy has D.Cox (M. Lee for that matter) written all over him. Huge, crafty tap work, goes forward and kicks goals. If he was on the board, there IS no choice surely. My reference to rioting is if we overlook the AA ruck at 200/100 for a 185/85.

 

[tigs2010]

any back flanker. Grundy has D.Cox (M. Lee for that matter) written all over him. Huge, crafty tap work, goes forward and kicks goals. If he was on the board, there IS no choice surely. My reference to rioting is if we overlook the AA ruck at 200/100 for a 185/85.

Was just wondering which one you were talking about.

I think Grundy will go to Port.

 

[linuscambridge]

I reckon hell be gone, but if hes not and we pick a 185cm back flanker, they'lle have to escort me from the GC convention centre.

Grundy looks good, but so did Fraser and Luenburger. Big gamble taking rucks so early and with free agency now in play it's much easier to land a ruck with exposed form that doesn't cost you a first round pick.

With Vickery and Grundy on the list, would there be any other club in the league with 2 top 10 draft pick rucks on their list?

And if he is still on the board, ask yourself why? Does Richmond seriously have a greater need for a quality ruck than any of the other clubs picking before us? Or perhaps do they have a different view to most posters on here about using early picks on ruckmen.

 

[Mr Brightside]

Dont stress people, wait for a couple of years to judge, best recruiters in the land fluke a few an balls up many, fact is plenty of draftees are not up to it for many reasons

 

[Broders]

"Grundy looks good, but so did Fraser and Luenburger. Big gamble taking rucks so early and with free agency now in play it's much easier to land a ruck with exposed form that doesn't cost you a first round pick."


So if every club adopts this philosophy then no ruckman will ever get drafted!!

Grundy is tipped to be ready to go for round 1. Take him and back the club culture, structure and support networks to not only help develop him into a premium ruckman but one that embraces the club and, like Deledio & Cotchin, turn their back and more lucrative offers from other clubs to stay at Tigerland.

Or we could do what we have done in the past 2 drafts and use our first pick on very solid but not startling footballers. Yes they will play 150 – 200 games of AFL football but they will never win one off their own boot. I’m sure we could pick up solid footballers with our 2nd and 3rd picks. It’s time to take a punt on a match winner with our first pick

 

[tigs2010]

I disagree Grundy is ready to go Round 1 at this stage. His weight is up but he still has a lot of development to go.

 

[ToraToraTora]

I reckon hell be gone, but if hes not and we pick a 185cm back flanker, they'lle have to escort me from the GC convention centre.

How about 187? Bluey.

I don't think our priorities have changed through the usual speculations and scuttlebutt.

1. Inside/outside mids with skill. No idiots. (But exceptions may be made.)
2. Line breaking/goal kicking/speccy taking forward 50 X-factor.
3. Promising or massive raps junior ruck.

In that order. I think we should keep stocking hard, committed, skilled, flexible midfield talent. At worst you can always trade them later i.e. Tambling.
But also of course BEST TALENT AVAILABLE with R1 picks. K.I.S.S. Don't get ahead of yourself, don't get speculative, don't get clever. Percentages, but hopefully they don't come into play.
R2-R3....best available x need. Get your research done, get feet on the ground, and hopefully you won't need fingers crossed.
R4...take a punt. Sure, compile your dossiers. But if you've got a hunch, why not.
Rookies....as we've already stated, experience...if the quality is there. But you don't want to miss a Dylan Grimes either.
I think Vlastuin is almost a lock no matter what happens. Our core isn't complete, and a piece or two will fall away in the next couple of years. But Grundy will be tempting if he's there no doubt.
The other thing I'd love to see is a little bit of luck. The 20ish rated Fyfe or Dangerfield who turns out to be a gun. In our case 32-34 rated. I guess Grimes again is the most recent example for us but before that I'm struggling to recall. Ivan as well I suppose. Grigg and Houli were pure research for me.

 

[linuscambridge]

"Grundy looks good, but so did Fraser and Luenburger. Big gamble taking rucks so early and with free agency now in play it's much easier to land a ruck with exposed form that doesn't cost you a first round pick."


So if every club adopts this philosophy then no ruckman will ever get drafted!

Not sure how you got that from my post, the question was where you take a good young ruck, how early in the draft.

And posters seem to think he can play next year, that's in spite of the trend being for clubs to play less rucks not more. I haven't seen Freo find a way to play Sandilands, Griffen and Clarke, the Kangaroos feel the need for Petrie, Goldstein and Macintosh, or Carlton to use Kruezer, Warnock and Hampson at the same time.

You just can't get enough mid fielders to rotate through the middle with that many rucks. So the question is do you want to spend pick 9 as insurance for Vickery or Maric, or are you happy to have your pick 9 running around at Coburg for 4 years till Maric wears out.

It's a big call for such a scarce resource as a top 10 pick. If Francis thinks he is far and away best available, fair enough, I'm just not sure what the coaches are going to do with him?

 

[Mr Brightside]

Can't remember this much excitement an mystery to who we will pick with our first pick for years...

 

[tigergollywog]

How about 187? Bluey.

I don't think our priorities have changed through the usual speculations and scuttlebutt.

1. Inside/outside mids with skill. No idiots. (But exceptions may be made.)
2. Line breaking/goal kicking/speccy taking forward 50 X-factor.
3. Promising or massive raps junior ruck.

Its a really unusual draft which makes it intriguing. There seems to be only 1 decent ruckman, 6-10 or so banker KPP and a million 180-190 mids. I reckon Vlas looks a ripper, but given there WILL be players like him at 32, I reckon youde be nuts to take one at 9. Not a big fan of Wines either for some reason i cant explain. I'll be doing cartwheels if we fluke the big snakey grundy pants or Jon 'chimp II' O'rourke. Macrae and Mayes get me pretty excited too. Only 5 more sleeps.

 

[Brodders17]

Not sure how you got that from my post, the question was where you take a good young ruck, how early in the draft.

And posters seem to think he can play next year, that's in spite of the trend being for clubs to play less rucks not more. I haven't seen Freo find a way to play Sandilands, Griffen and Clarke, the Kangaroos feel the need for Petrie, Goldstein and Macintosh, or Carlton to use Kruezer, Warnock and Hampson at the same time.

You just can't get enough mid fielders to rotate through the middle with that many rucks. So the question is do you want to spend pick 9 as insurance for Vickery or Maric, or are you happy to have your pick 9 running around at Coburg for 4 years till Maric wears out.

It's a big call for such a scarce resource as a top 10 pick. If Francis thinks he is far and away best available, fair enough, I'm just not sure what the coaches are going to do with him?

to me it depends whether Grundy will be capable of playing as a key forward. TV gets a game as a key forward, the fact he is also a back-up ruck is a bonus- same as Petrie for the Roos. That is a big difference to the Freo and Blooze's trios. None of them are forwards. If grundy is good enough to also warrant playing as a forward (alongside TV) in the short to medium term then he is a great fit, IMO. ( i say this without having any idea if he is actually any good.)

 

[pmac21]

I wonder how much the recruiters to and fro with the decisions leading up to draft day. I have a feeling that one or two of the more highly rated players will slide and I'm think it may be Toumpas or O'Rourke?? I think the Bulldogs will take a tall as will GWS & Brisbane. I would take McRae as first option as he reminds me of Gaff from WC. Grundy will be solid but we wont take him I believe and I think he will be gone. Wouldnt suprise if Grundy is taken by the Dogs. This is my top 9:

GWS:Whitfield
GWS: Wines
GWS: Plowman
Melb: Vlastuin
WB: McRae
WB: Grundy
PA: Mayes
Bris: Jaksch
US: Toumpas or O'Rourke...

 

[linuscambridge]

to me it depends whether Grundy will be capable of playing as a key forward. TV gets a game as a key forward, the fact he is also a back-up ruck is a bonus- same as Petrie for the Roos. That is a big difference to the Freo and Blooze's trios. None of them are forwards. If grundy is good enough to also warrant playing as a forward (alongside TV) in the short to medium term then he is a great fit, IMO. ( i say this without having any idea if he is actually any good.)

Hit the nail on the head, but then you are saying Grundy will be a better forward than Griffiths, Astbury or Elton, guys that are actually considered real forwards and not ruckmen playing forward, because they are the ones that will be competing for the third tall spot.

Again I ask the question, is there a precedent of a club playing 2 genuine rucks as part time forwards? I can't think of one.

 

[bullus_hit]

Again I ask the question, is there a precedent of a club playing 2 genuine rucks as part time forwards? I can't think of one.

Just check this year's AA team for the answer to that question.