Worst List in the Comp for the Next few years

[Lidsand]

Harry,
I was not a fan of picking up Hislop, Thompson, Kingsley, Houlihan, Hudson, etc either.

But let me play devils' advocate for a minute......if a club like Richmond who has doubled the personnel in their football department, which says to me we have been under resourced......maybe we traded away our draft picks and/or wasted them on dud young players because we didn't have the off-field infrastructures in place to actually make our picks count?

Its o.k people keep bleating about tank, get picks, tank, get more picks...then we draft 10 superstars and then say hello to sustained success......but its fantasy world stuff mate.
Its great in theory and sounds fantastic....but you have to take into account all the other things that surround it...lets pick out just a couple:
* Corporate sponsors = do they want to be associated and invest in a losing club? Will their lack of money affect the football department and attracting top quality personnel to find these top kids we are supposedly going to draft with all thes priority/draft picks?
* Fans.....will they keep buying memberships if we keep losing? = lack of income
* Players....can we negotiate good players to come to the club if our grand plan is losing games and getting draft picks for 'maybe success' in 2012+ ?

Nobody will invest heavily in a club that hasn't got a concrete grand plan and is relying on a lottery for 'maybe success in a few years'.

I think what we need to do first is get the off-field stuff right, which looks to be heading in the right direction....I think the appointment of Benny Gale is a good one as well.
Then we need to get the right coach and I am really happy that the club didn't wilt to the likes of Sheedy or Buckley and are still going through their process.
As for the players...there are some players that need to go as all clubs have, even the top ones....but I think the core of the list does have potential.

I look back at 1995......we made a prelim with a list that, on paper, had half the skills of the list we have now....but the 1995 list had one thing our current list don't have, and that was to play for each other each week and give 100%.
They tackled in packs of 3 and 4...never gave up...and while they didn't have flash skills, they had a comraderie about them.
If we can somehow get the "teamwork" amongst this current group...I think we can make some good strides next year.

top post mate

 

[Dyer Disciple]

I think what we need to do first is get the off-field stuff right, which looks to be heading in the right direction....

Fortunately the Board caught onto this 5 years ago, and was working away at it while many lashed into them about our coach or recruitment.

 

[Lidsand]

Fortunately the Board caught onto this 5 years ago, and was working away at it while many lashed into them about our coach or recruitment.

sacking miller was the clincher

 

[Harry]

i think we already have enough rejects. we just need a couple more years to pick up some aging rucks, and for the rest of the list to come good. 2012 i think we will be close to undefeated.

yep that's all we need - a couple of ageing rucks and all will be sweet. can't wait till 2012.

 

[Harry]

I look back at 1995......we made a prelim with a list that, on paper, had half the skills of the list we have now....

lol - almost missed this one.

again massively overrating our current list

if only the game was played on paper.

 

[tigersnake]

the following is the saints list, who many said had missed the opportunity and would need to rebuild.

allen: hasnt impacted
armitage: 21 yr old midfielder who has struggled for a game this year.
baker: too small. too old. average kick.
ball: no2 pick who cant get a game.
begley: lions reject.
blake: 189cm ruckman/kpd. too small.
clarke r: high draft pick who has done little. PREnders would have called for trade
clakre x: ditto.
del santo: dropped last year. PREnder wouldve traded. would be howled at for being soft
dawson: hawks reject.
dempster: swans reject
eddy: average player
fisher l: has played 55games in 6 years.
fisher s: didnt consolidate his spot until he was 23yrs old.
gardiner: wce reject. recruited as a 28yr old after playing no games the previous year, and 18 the previous 4.
geary: rookie pick. going well.
gilbert: 194cm flanker.
goddard: pick 1 who took 4 years to be considered a good player, and 6 to be a star. PREnders wouldve traded.
gram:lions reject
gwilt: flanker who is just starting to consolidate his spot in the team as a 22yr old.
hayes: star pick 11. is nearly 30. PREnders wouldve tried to trade.
hudgton: 33yr old. shouldve been pensioned off.
jones: cant kick. missed by all other clubs til he was 24.
king: reject, recruited at 29, behind blake!
koschitzke: failed to live upto no2 pick. PREnders would have calling for his trade.
macquire: injured. PREnders would have wanted his delisting.
mcevoy: good young ruckman.
mcqualter:glass half full type.
milne: until this year had no defensive game. PREnders wouldve traded post 2007, when he kicked 32goals, and aver 12 possies. similar to his 06 year.
montagna: in 2005 was a 22yr old, averaging 15possies and less than a goal a game. PREnders wouldve have traded/delisted.
ray: doggie reject. soft flanker.
riewoldt: star. cant kick a goal tho. mentally soft??
schneider: swan reject.
stevens: promising kid. very small.

not saying the tiges are anywhere near the saints, but its not exactly what PREnders would consider a well drafted,well constructed list. they have traded picks. only have one high-top 5- pick making a real impact. held onto aging players. recruited aging players. have a few average kicks. their key defenders are rejects, dawson, too short, blake-189cm, too old and short, maxie, 84kgs, gilbert, or injured, macquire. and they are 19-0.

Post of the month for me. Tops. Yes we have some work to do with the list, but we need a mini rebuild rather than a groundup one.. By that I mean a lot of sackings this year, less next year, then we could see some real improvement. Contrast this with the past when we were scratching for anyone to keep.

Your point is well made Brodders, half or more of the Saints list would have been condemned as duds to jettison ASAP on PRE over the last 2-3 seasons if they were Richmond players. 2 More stars, a few less bums, a decent coach, away we go baby. It ain't wrist slashing time.

 

[tigerdave]

When you've played finals footy 3 times in 29 years you could say our list has been bad for a long,long time.

 

[TOT70]

the following is the saints list, who many said had missed the opportunity and would need to rebuild.

allen: hasnt impacted
armitage: 21 yr old midfielder who has struggled for a game this year.
baker: too small. too old. average kick.
ball: no2 pick who cant get a game.
begley: lions reject.
blake: 189cm ruckman/kpd. too small.
clarke r: high draft pick who has done little. PREnders would have called for trade
clakre x: ditto.
del santo: dropped last year. PREnder wouldve traded. would be howled at for being soft
dawson: hawks reject.
dempster: swans reject
eddy: average player
fisher l: has played 55games in 6 years.
fisher s: didnt consolidate his spot until he was 23yrs old.
gardiner: wce reject. recruited as a 28yr old after playing no games the previous year, and 18 the previous 4.
geary: rookie pick. going well.
gilbert: 194cm flanker.
goddard: pick 1 who took 4 years to be considered a good player, and 6 to be a star. PREnders wouldve traded.
gram:lions reject
gwilt: flanker who is just starting to consolidate his spot in the team as a 22yr old.
hayes: star pick 11. is nearly 30. PREnders wouldve tried to trade.
hudgton: 33yr old. shouldve been pensioned off.
jones: cant kick. missed by all other clubs til he was 24.
king: reject, recruited at 29, behind blake!
koschitzke: failed to live upto no2 pick. PREnders would have calling for his trade.
macquire: injured. PREnders would have wanted his delisting.
mcevoy: good young ruckman.
mcqualter:glass half full type.
milne: until this year had no defensive game. PREnders wouldve traded post 2007, when he kicked 32goals, and aver 12 possies. similar to his 06 year.
montagna: in 2005 was a 22yr old, averaging 15possies and less than a goal a game. PREnders wouldve have traded/delisted.
ray: doggie reject. soft flanker.
riewoldt: star. cant kick a goal tho. mentally soft??
schneider: swan reject.
stevens: promising kid. very small.

not saying the tiges are anywhere near the saints, but its not exactly what PREnders would consider a well drafted,well constructed list. they have traded picks. only have one high-top 5- pick making a real impact. held onto aging players. recruited aging players. have a few average kicks. their key defenders are rejects, dawson, too short, blake-189cm, too old and short, maxie, 84kgs, gilbert, or injured, macquire. and they are 19-0.

Chuckle, chuckle, chuckle.

So are you saying is that players progress at different rates, that some players improve over time and others stagnate and that there are several mechanisms for getting the players that you want onto a list, each of which has its place? Them's fighting words around these parts.

What St Kilda have done is to develop the player that they already have that they want to keep and have set about the task of adding more players that they want. They have drafted, rookied, recycled, traded and PSDed their way to nineteen wins on the trot and counting.

That looks like a sensible strategy to me. Far more likely to succeed than the Scorched Earth policy- delist, retire, trade-away everyone and start again and again and again. It makes a mockery of the cries to "Trade last year's first-rounder for a third-rounder, if you can get one."

Farren Ray, Zac Dawson, Adam Schneider, Michael Gardner, Jason Blake, X and Montagna. Who'da thunk it?

Do you know what is really interesting? Leigh Montagna is a more valuable player than Luke Ball. Again, who'da thunk it?

 

[TigerMasochist]

Guilty as charged and a good post Brodders.

What's been the single biggest change in their turnaround?

The coach IMO. Lyon has done a splendid job since coming out of Paul Roos school.

That's a brilliant piece of work by Brodders picking through the Saints list of duds and rejects.
Your right on the money with your comment about Ross the Boss Lyon.
Took him two years of getting abused to get the Saints playing the footy he demands, but it's *smile* scarey how well they play " frontal pressure "
Funny how Clarko took a few years to invent the "Cluster" and pinch a flag from nowhere.
Didn't Thompson take a few years to build his list and "game plan" so they could play finals over and over.
Roosy and Woosha, different game plans but they forced their methods on their teams and played back to back.
Truth is there is not a huge amount of difference in the capabilities of sides.
There is a huge amount of difference in the development stages of various teams and in the ability of the coaches to " SELL " their game plan to the team.

 

[TOT70]

That's a brilliant piece of work by Brodders picking through the Saints list of duds and rejects.
Your right on the money with your comment about Ross the Boss Lyon.
Took him two years of getting abused to get the Saints playing the footy he demands, but it's *smile*ing scarey how well they play " frontal pressure "
Funny how Clarko took a few years to invent the "Cluster" and pinch a flag from nowhere.
Didn't Thompson take a few years to build his list and "game plan" so they could play finals over and over.
Roosy and Woosha, different game plans but they forced their methods on their teams and played back to back.
Truth is there is not a huge amount of difference in the capabilities of sides.
There is a huge amount of difference in the development stages of various teams and in the ability of the coaches to " SELL " their game plan to the team.

Nicely put.

 

[the claw]

the following is the saints list, who many said had missed the opportunity and would need to rebuild.

allen: hasnt impacted
armitage: 21 yr old midfielder who has struggled for a game this year.
baker: too small. too old. average kick.
ball: no2 pick who cant get a game.
begley: lions reject.
blake: 189cm ruckman/kpd. too small.
clarke r: high draft pick who has done little. PREnders would have called for trade
clakre x: ditto.
del santo: dropped last year. PREnder wouldve traded. would be howled at for being soft
dawson: hawks reject.
dempster: swans reject
eddy: average player
fisher l: has played 55games in 6 years.
fisher s: didnt consolidate his spot until he was 23yrs old.
gardiner: wce reject. recruited as a 28yr old after playing no games the previous year, and 18 the previous 4.
geary: rookie pick. going well.
gilbert: 194cm flanker.
goddard: pick 1 who took 4 years to be considered a good player, and 6 to be a star. PREnders wouldve traded.
gram:lions reject
gwilt: flanker who is just starting to consolidate his spot in the team as a 22yr old.
hayes: star pick 11. is nearly 30. PREnders wouldve tried to trade.
hudgton: 33yr old. shouldve been pensioned off.
jones: cant kick. missed by all other clubs til he was 24.
king: reject, recruited at 29, behind blake!
koschitzke: failed to live upto no2 pick. PREnders would have calling for his trade.
macquire: injured. PREnders would have wanted his delisting.
mcevoy: good young ruckman.
mcqualter:glass half full type.
milne: until this year had no defensive game. PREnders wouldve traded post 2007, when he kicked 32goals, and aver 12 possies. similar to his 06 year.
montagna: in 2005 was a 22yr old, averaging 15possies and less than a goal a game. PREnders wouldve have traded/delisted.
ray: doggie reject. soft flanker.
riewoldt: star. cant kick a goal tho. mentally soft??
schneider: swan reject.
stevens: promising kid. very small.

not saying the tiges are anywhere near the saints, but its not exactly what PREnders would consider a well drafted,well constructed list. they have traded picks. only have one high-top 5- pick making a real impact. held onto aging players. recruited aging players. have a few average kicks. their key defenders are rejects, dawson, too short, blake-189cm, too old and short, maxie, 84kgs, gilbert, or injured, macquire. and they are 19-0.

lol and im accused of twisting things to suit. or perhaps its typical richmond grossly over rate our own and undervalue the opposition.

Allen; all australian junior drafted 2006. missed nearly all of 07 with injury. had a very solid 08 broke into their semi final side and injured his hip which has kept him out of most of 2009. was a player we should have taken at 58 in 06. hasnt come on eh hes hardly got up and going due to injury. but when he has has shown enough. also with riewoldt and koschitzke he should find it hard to break into their side when fit yet alone when injured dont you think.

Armitage a first round pick taken in 06. played 3 games in 07. 13 in 08 including two finals is pretty good inside needs to develop a little on the outside. has struggled so far this yr hasnt played many and may be injured .

Baker 28 yr old one of the better taggers going around rough around the edges but like kirk at sydney brings plenty to the table.missed all but 2 games last yr due to a knee. a second round selection at 27.

Ball injury riddled and a little over rated in recent yrs imo. was very good up to 2005. suffered severe osteitis pubis in 06 and 07. at the end of 07 had surgery on the adductor and then had a solid 08. still he missed the last 7 games of 08 with hamstring problems probably stemming from his op. even so in 08 missing 7 games he finished second in contested possesions tackles and centre clearances. imo his pace has become his problem so many injuries has robbed him of this is only a shadow of what he was and could be gone not because of ability but the toll on his body.. he will always have to carefully manage his groin. first rnd pick no 2 in the nd.

Begley a project player at the lions just a rookie selection. the saints obviously saw something and decided to waste pick 83 on the then 21 yr old in the nd.

Blake a very under rated player who was asked to play ruck because of an absence of them at stkilda. now that they have 4 or 5 ruckmen and an abundance of kpds he is now getting third tall roles in defence. 2nd rnd pick no 24.

Clarke dud. first rnd pick no 8

Clarke dud. firt rnd pick no 5.

Dal santo hmm yep he got dropped and rightly so.has always been a damaging player by foot. something the rfc lack. he may be deficient in the hard side of the game but like nathan buckley makes up for it with his class. nonsense to think pre's would want to trade him. first rnd pick no 13.

Dawson having 5 yrs at hawthorn and doing little they ran out of patience. for what he gave in those 5 yrs its no wonder they delisted him. they obviously saw something in him to persevere for so long. im sure the hawks would like their time again with this one but one cannot blame them for getting rid of him when they did. always had decent skills size and commitment was always the issue. original 3rd rnd pick no 41. stkilda took him in the rookie draft. nothing to lose and what they needed as far as type went we need his type as well.

Dempster a swans premiership player and imo a shock trade. a tall running defender and a type sydney could little afford to lose.
was originally drafted in the third rnd at 34. cost stkilda a second rnd pick no 26 hardly a reject.

Eddy ordinary player at best but again a rookie selection wont last on their list imo.

L Fisher ordinary player was forced out of their team by that reject dempster until dempster did his knee. wont last long on their list imo.

S Fisher lol about those comments about him. where you been. sam has been very good since the end of 05. 3rd b&f 06 2nd b&f 07 1st b&f 08. aa 08 international team 06. of course your not going to establish yourself till age 23 if you are drafted at the ripe old age of 21. 4th rnd pick no 55.

Gardiner not a reject wce were forced to let him go because of offield indiscretions. was at the time of the cousins scandals.i know for fact they did not want to lose him but had no option.
was at one time the best ruckman in the comp until injuries cruelled him. was prepared to give it away at the end of lastyr but was talked around by stkilda. the only issue with gardiner was if he could ever overcome injury. between knees broken foot and numerous other injuries hes done well to get back to such good form. stkilda took the punt because they had no ruckmen and they had a good list. original 1st rnd pick no 1 stkilda paid a 3rd rnd pick no 43 for him.

i could go on but cant see the point.
the fact is stkilda have numerous 1st and second rnd picks thru their list. because of a bottoming out process 2000 16th 2001 15th 2002 th and a lesser degree 2003 11th.
they made finals in 04 five yrs after they started their bottom out process.. 05 finals again, both these yrs they were cruelled by injury and could well have pinched a flag with a bit of luck. 2006 6th. 2007 9th. 2008 4th.

and yep in recent yrs they have taken recycled players but they were in a position to do this because of the 00 to 03 yrs. they had shown to themselves they had got their rebuild pretty right because of finals in 04 05.
to even compare them to us in any way is laughable we are nowhere near them and like the title of the thread suggests have the worst list in the comp.

we are yet to go thru stkildas 00 - 03 yrs until we do we will struggle.

 

[the claw]

Sorry Claw...I'm not into the "development will take care of itself" and other really important factors 'just happening'.

Nothing 'just happens' or 'takes care of itself'.....in fact, I would think it was this attitude that has put us in this position to begin with.

Look at the Saints......they pretty much have the same personnel that Grant Thomas had but players that were not unlike some of the so-called "duds" we have are now playing bloody good footy. Mainly due to the coaching staff, the game-plan, and the culture of the club changing.
All off-field decisions.

You can say that Lyon had the cattle to begin with......well, I could turn and say if you think Richmond haven't got the cattle then don't you think its is very important to get the right coach, right recruiter, and right devlopment staff in place FIRST so we DO get the right cattle and do utitlise our draft picks right?
And who knows....if we do that...maybe some of the cattle we actually have now aren't as bad as people think...ala the Saints and some of their players (Gilbert, Jones, Gardiner, McQualter, etc).....some of those players might not be there now if Lyon didn't come in.

As for development "taking care of itself"......nah, I think if we had a proper development and fitness staff at the club, we'd be in a lot better shape.
The young players coming through, like Lids and Bling, who have been at the club 5 years would be better and more consistent players I reckon as a result.
Better physically....able to hold tackles, run hard...as well as being better mentally.

These things just don't care of themselves.

you know why we cant develop players livvers . its simple bud. we draft players with chronic deficieny and their flaws are not fixable. im not saying dont focus on development im saying a lot of the development problems we have cant be fixed no matter how good we become in this area but hey good of you to focus on this i notice you ignore all else written and still fail to answer relevant questions. what do you propose we do in the interim livvers not a hard question . oh i know lets ignore the draft and the correct processes and blame it all on development.

 

[jimbob]

Seems to me there is a lot of going around in circles stuff here. The St Kilda list detail is very interesting - a mix of draft picks they got right - some they got wrong & recycled players that they appear to have been fairly successful in picking up. We will pick early in this draft - no panacea for success - we have drafted poorly & traded poorly over the past decade. We are moving in the right direction to finally get some full time recruiters into place - hopefully they end up being stars at spotting talent. We could have bottomed out till the cows came home with the way we were set up & the kids we decided to pick. Banik & Lounder 2 of our best chpices (yes, they were earlier than the last 10 years). All of this is predicated on the belief that at some stage..... finally - we, as a club, will get out sh-t together in all facets of the game - both on & off the field. We can't cull too many at once but we do need to participate in this draft as much as we can cos pickings are gonna be lean for a while. I definitely agree that we should pick players with skill as we are unable to develop these at our club - thats been proven. And, I know it's the subject of other threads but the culture thing is critical to turn around how we perform as a club. The losing disease seeps into players & we seem to be able to drag talented players back to the lowest common denominator rather than the better players lifting those around them. It's vital for young blokes particularly so they don't wither on the vine.

We have lost games over the last couple of years for nothing other than being mentally soft & not believing we were good enough. Lets get the right building blocks together, get a decent, hard nosed coach with the appropriate support staff to develop the boys - draft the best kids that we can when it's our turn in the order & not beat ourselves up over who got what but rather - have we got a player here ? If there is something we can learn from the way other Clubs have drafted/traded - beauty..... adopt it - maybe do something brilliant ourselves for a change & shock eveyone (icnluding our supporters). Yes, the theory is that the earlier a club picks the better, but by hell there are a lot of dud early picks & a lot of later stars - the rookie draft is a great example of kids going all the way through - ignored for whatever reason & then getting a lifeline. I don't care where we pick em - I just hope that our picks are better than every other clubs.

 

[Harry]

the last thing we wanna do is think a coach, any coach can turn our list around. this will be suicide, our list is ordinary people don't fool yourselves and hopefully the club realises this and starts to recruit properly. any prospective coach that says he can turn this list around should be shown the door no questions asked. if we wanna overrate our list as usual and do a half arsed attempt to build this list then we'll all meet here again in 5 years time. haven't we learnt from the past? frawley and wallace both overrated our list and neglected the draft and topped up - where did it get us?

 

[Brodders17]

lol and im accused of twisting things to suit. or perhaps its typical richmond grossly over rate our own and undervalue the opposition.

i havent rated richmond at all in this post, not have i undervalued the saints. i have stated facts, and what pre's would think. example being del santo, you reckon there wouldnt be folk here wanting to trade him but yet some want to trade lids?

S Fisher lol about those comments about him. where you been. sam has been very good since the end of 05. 3rd b&f 06 2nd b&f 07 1st b&f 08. aa 08 international team 06. of course your not going to establish yourself till age 23 if you are drafted at the ripe old age of 21. 4th rnd pick no 55.

so you agree he consolidated his spot as a 23 yr old??

the fact is stkilda have numerous 1st and second rnd picks thru their list. because of a bottoming out process 2000 16th 2001 15th 2002 th and a lesser degree 2003 11th.

in 2000 they had picks 1 and 2- riewoldt and kosi. their next pick was rd 5.
in 2001 they had picks 2, 5, 13 and 21. 1 overrated (your words) player who is struggling for a game- ball, 1 dud- clarke, 1 good outside mid- del santo, and 1 injured player who hasnt played this year.
in 2002 they had picks 1 and 22, then traded their 3rd pick. goddard and ferguson.
in 2003 they had pick 8 then next pick in rd 4. pick 8 was clarke. dud-your word.

thats 4 players getting a regular game this year. the team is not built around the 1st and 2nd rd picks from those 4 years.

we are yet to go thru stkildas 00 - 03 yrs until we do we will struggle.

in 2004 we had picks 1,4, 12, 16 and 20
in 2005 we had picks 8 and 24
in 2006 we had picks 13 and 26
in 2007 we had picks 2 and 18

thats 11 1st or 2nd round picks in the 4 year cycle vs the saints 9. we have 3 top 5 picks to their 5.

once again claw, i am not comparing lists. the purpose of the exercise was to look at the saints list, and the players who have won them 19 games and where they have come from.

Chuckle, chuckle, chuckle.

So are you saying is that players progress at different rates, that some players improve over time and others stagnate and that there are several mechanisms for getting the players that you want onto a list, each of which has its place? Them's fighting words around these parts.

What St Kilda have done is to develop the player that they already have that they want to keep and have set about the task of adding more players that they want. They have drafted, rookied, recycled, traded and PSDed their way to nineteen wins on the trot and counting.

 

[the claw]

i havent rated richmond at all in this post, not have i undervalued the saints. i have stated facts, and what pre's would think. example being del santo, you reckon there wouldnt be folk here wanting to trade him but yet some want to trade lids?
so you agree he consolidated his spot as a 23 yr old??
in 2000 they had picks 1 and 2- riewoldt and kosi. their next pick was rd 5.
in 2001 they had picks 2, 5, 13 and 21. 1 overrated (your words) player who is struggling for a game- ball, 1 dud- clarke, 1 good outside mid- del santo, and 1 injured player who hasnt played this year.
in 2002 they had picks 1 and 22, then traded their 3rd pick. goddard and ferguson.
in 2003 they had pick 8 then next pick in rd 4. pick 8 was clarke. dud-your word.

thats 4 players getting a regular game this year. the team is not built around the 1st and 2nd rd picks from those 4 years.

in 2004 we had picks 1,4, 12, 16 and 20
in 2005 we had picks 8 and 24
in 2006 we had picks 13 and 26
in 2007 we had picks 2 and 18

thats 11 1st or 2nd round picks in the 4 year cycle vs the saints 9. we have 3 top 5 picks to their 5.

once again claw, i am not comparing lists. the purpose of the exercise was to look at the saints list, and the players who have won them 19 games and where they have come from.

2000 because they bottomed out they took the best two players in the country. riewoldt 1 koschitzke 2. bottoming out also gave them the opportunity picks to trade and snare 24 yr old gehrig for pick 18 and david sierakowski. and 23 yr old hamill for draft pick 4.they got pick 4 from port for wakelin. they got hamill because they had first pick in the psd and the leverage to make carlton deal. hamill was a damn fine player who had to prematurely give it away because of his body. bottoming out is not about just early picks. gehrig was an excellent pick up as well. they also did player for player swaps for callaghan and capuano. trading for ruckman is a lesson they never learnt they failed to use a decent pick on a young ruckman until 2007 even after then they have been forced to take gardiner king before that clarke ackland. they did trade for brooks with pick 6 yep they got plenty wrong.

01 ball at 2 an aa in 05 yeah i did say in RECENT TIMES HES BEEN A BIT OVERRATED BECAUSE OF HIS BODY, up until op he was a gun. in 04 he played a big role in their resurgance. even last yr he played a significant role in them finishing 4th. one thig for sure a slow and battered luke ball is a better player than most on our list. so is dal santo taken at 13. maguire taken at 21 had a great 04 until op. 05 was fantastic and he was important to them playing finals that yr. injuries have really cruelled this club and cut players careers short. you cant draft for injury. 37 montagna was taken

02 the only one left from 02 is goddard and leigh fisher goddard is a player and has been for a fair while . 02 they traded pick 17 for the then 21 yo penny in an attempt to shore up the backline. once again they were out of luck hip injury cut pennys career short in 05.
to me the key has been they have hung onto their early picks and traded for good players at the same time in this period.in the main they have traded for longer term prospects with one or two exceptions.
their 04 finals was built on powell 03 baker98 ball 01, blake 99, x clarke 01, dal santo 01, gehrig 00, goddard 02,guerra 03, hamil 00, harvey 87, hayes 98 hudghton 96,jones 94, koschitzke 00. maguire 01,milne 01, montagna, 01, penny 02, riewoldt 01.thompson 96. voss 01.
these are the 22 who almost took them to a gf in 04 most were taken in their rebuild phase 00 to 03. not all are early picks obviously but its been argued to death by me bottoming out is not just about the early picks. ive never argued against trades the psd ive been stringently against trading early picks while in rebuild. stkilda were smart they kept their early picks and managed to trade into other early picks which they then used in trades. the psd has helped as well. until last yr or the yr before the value of pick 1 in the psd should not be underestimated weather you use the pick or not.

it can be easily argued that stkildas real quality has been attained in the yrs they bottomed out.

we are going to disagree no matter what its the way it is it seems. one thing for sure our list is crap and the players on stkildas list has been underestimated by a lot of people just by looking at their ladder positions since 03 tells us this is the case. i wonder what have our ladder positions been. what are the skill set of most of our players what is our depth like what is the list structure like.
in typical richmond fashion we overrate our list of duds and be little what other clubs have regularly achieved. what i would not give for finishes of 3,3 6 9 4 and 1 over the next 6yrs this is what stkilda have done over the past 6.
in that time we have gone 16 12 9 16 9 and more than likely 15. chalk and cheese.
the real key and lesson is they hung onto their pp and pick 1.

every time this debate is raised just the pps and early picks are focused on. simply put when you have a crap list you have to utilse the nd to the max hopefully with as many early picks as you can get your hands on. make no mistake we have a crap list. the correct process is to maximise the draft when early rebuild begins, we are still in early rebuild because of mistakes. we have to recognise that fact or stay mired in mediocrity. any way i await for the replies and around and around it will go.

 

[AstroboyUK]

when I read the title of this thread I thought - ew no, not agen! We have the worst list AGAIN. AGAIN?! How can we have the worst list again? We only had the worst list a couple of years ago, surely its not our turn again already? At the start of the year all you blokes were telling me we'd make the 8! How could we be making the 8 when we have the WORST LIST IN THE COMP ........AGAIN. It doesnt make sense. I find this whole thing confusing, mind you Ive not been the same since round 1 anyway.

 

[Brodders17]

every time this debate is raised just the pps and early picks are focused on. simply put when you have a crap list you have to utilse the nd to the max hopefully with as many early picks as you can get your hands on. make no mistake we have a crap list. the correct process is to maximise the draft when early rebuild begins, we are still in early rebuild because of mistakes. we have to recognise that fact or stay mired in mediocrity. any way i await for the replies and around and around it will go.

we prob dont disagree so much on this. my point was the saints list, the players that have taken them to 19-0 this year, is made up of all types. a couple of early picks, a few more late rd 1, later picks, rookies, trades, mature age picks and psd. not all their players are elite. some have ordinary footskills. there are some you label duds, or very ordinary getting a game. but every week they send 22players out who do their job and play very good football.
and yes i would much see the tiges 19-0 than our 5wins.

 

[Big Cat Lover]

i havent rated richmond at all in this post, not have i undervalued the saints. i have stated facts, and what pre's would think. example being del santo, you reckon there wouldnt be folk here wanting to trade him but yet some want to trade lids?
so you agree he consolidated his spot as a 23 yr old??
in 2000 they had picks 1 and 2- riewoldt and kosi. their next pick was rd 5.
in 2001 they had picks 2, 5, 13 and 21. 1 overrated (your words) player who is struggling for a game- ball, 1 dud- clarke, 1 good outside mid- del santo, and 1 injured player who hasnt played this year.
in 2002 they had picks 1 and 22, then traded their 3rd pick. goddard and ferguson.
in 2003 they had pick 8 then next pick in rd 4. pick 8 was clarke. dud-your word.

thats 4 players getting a regular game this year. the team is not built around the 1st and 2nd rd picks from those 4 years.

IMO team is built around Reiwoldt & Kosi - take them out and you have a mid-table team. Goddard a pretty handy player also. Picks 1,2 & 1. No surprise really.

 

[Liverpool]

IMO team is built around Reiwoldt & Kosi - take them out and you have a mid-table team. Goddard a pretty handy player also. Picks 1,2 & 1. No surprise really.

Funny isn't it.
They played on the weekend WITHOUT Riewoldt and Goddard....Kosi goes goalless....and yet they beat, Hawthorn on the weekend with Hodge (pick-1), Roughead (2), Franklin (5), Dowler (6), and Lewis (7) in their team.
Not bad for a mid-table team.

It just shows you that a list like St.Kilda that was struggling to make the finals halfway through last season...dropped Milne and Dal Santo as a result...and the list was condemned....yet by getting the off-field areas correct (such as coaching staff...they brought in Tudor from Geelong to help their forward line set-up) and a proper gameplan as well as some faith in a majority of the list that were classed as "duds" (who thought Gardiner would be as good as he has been this season?)....they are now only a few wins away from being one of the most dominant teams in AFL/VFL history.
Oh...and did I tell you that they beat last years Premiers last week that had a few of their top-10 draft picks playing while having a host of their own top players out?

Getting/having the cattle is one thing.....what you do with it is another...and unless you have coaching, recruiting, and devlopment all on the same page and sufficient funds spent in these areas FIRST...then you can have all the top-10 picks you like and you still won't be any good.