2022 Draft Thread | 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.

2022 Draft Thread

I think the below would be a good outcome for us personally. Good outcomes for us, good outcomes for WC (they slide back for Busslinger and Hewett), good outcomes for GWS and not bad for Port (assuming they aren't that sold on picks this year).

First trade

Richmond In - Pick 2, 39
Richmond Out - Picks 12, F1 and 31
West Coast In - Picks 8, 12 and 31
West Coast Out - Picks 2, 39 and Rioli
Port In - Future 1st (Richmond), Rioli
Port Out - Pick 8

Second trade (to GWS)
Richmond In - Taranto and 21
Richmond Out - 2

Third trade
Richmond In - Picks 58, 60 and Hopper
Richmond Out - 19, 39 and Soldo

Net trades for Richmond are:
In - Hopper, Taranto and Picks 21, 58 and 60
Out - 12, F1, 19, 31 and Soldo

Net trades for GWS are:
In - 2, 19, 39 and Soldo
Out - Hopper, Taranto, 21, 58 and 60

We go to the draft after talls, and go 21 (Keeler), 58 (will come in a heap as picks disappear - Lemmey) and 60 (again will come in a lot - D'Aloia)

GWS take Cadman and Sheezel with 2 and 3.
If we somehow managed to get pick 2 Cadman would be a Richmond player next year, I wouldn't hesitate for a second. As for getting both the GWS players, it wouldn't be possible but we could always settle on Tom Mitchell for a couple of years.
 
Marshall is the best option I can see but even he needs to back it up this year, not yet an established gun.

I'm still more comfortable with one big trade & a couple junior key forwards, Jefferson my preference but Keeler & say, Lemmey and/or Knobel would be a decent fall back option. I don't think we can get anyone decent if our first pick is in the 50s, this would be the range for D'Aloia who is also the type we are looking for. I think it would be a big mistake to trade all of 12, 19, 30 & next year's first, that to me is like selling the farm.
BH I can’t see us trading out all picks. Especially this year. GWS will be flushed with picks this year so it will be a combo of this year and next years picks.

I am highly confident we will be left with pick 19 once the Taranto and Hopper trades are done. I am still expecting 3 picks within the top 40.
 
I think the below would be a good outcome for us personally. Good outcomes for us, good outcomes for WC (they slide back for Busslinger and Hewett), good outcomes for GWS and not bad for Port (assuming they aren't that sold on picks this year).

First trade

Richmond In - Pick 2, 39
Richmond Out - Picks 12, F1 and 31
West Coast In - Picks 8, 12 and 31
West Coast Out - Picks 2, 39 and Rioli
Port In - Future 1st (Richmond), Rioli
Port Out - Pick 8

Second trade (to GWS)
Richmond In - Taranto and 21
Richmond Out - 2

Third trade
Richmond In - Picks 58, 60 and Hopper
Richmond Out - 19, 39 and Soldo

Net trades for Richmond are:
In - Hopper, Taranto and Picks 21, 58 and 60
Out - 12, F1, 19, 31 and Soldo

Net trades for GWS are:
In - 2, 19, 39 and Soldo
Out - Hopper, Taranto, 21, 58 and 60

We go to the draft after talls, and go 21 (Keeler), 58 (will come in a heap as picks disappear - Lemmey) and 60 (again will come in a lot - D'Aloia)

GWS take Cadman and Sheezel with 2 and 3.
Love the idea posh but clubs stating they are willing to split a pick in the top few are full of *smile*. Never happens.

It’s all posturing.
 
BH I can’t see us trading out all picks. Especially this year. GWS will be flushed with picks this year so it will be a combo of this year and next years picks.

I am highly confident we will be left with pick 19 once the Taranto and Hopper trades are done. I am still expecting 3 picks within the top 40.
Doesn't trading next year's first give you a slight feeling of uneasiness? I'm actually very wary of another Biddiscombe scenario.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Doesn't trading next year's first give you a slight feeling of uneasiness? I'm actually very wary of another Biddiscombe scenario.
Not at all. You have to remember we are no longer run like we were back in the Biddiscombe days. The complete opposite. Our list management is arguably led by the best in the business in Hartley.

List management isn’t a year to year thing. It’s done over an extended period of time. Last years method to go all in at the draft would have been planned around the fact we were looking to be heavily active at the trade table this year.
 
Dimma was at the WAFL GF yesterday, more than likely at the Colts GF too.

I've just finished watching a replay of the Colts game, I was mainly keeping an eye out for the talls. Peel Thunder and West Perth have got some talented key position players.

Draper from Peel is a 195 cm chf, they said he missed a lot of the season with an ankle injury, he certainly was certainly moving ok on it yesterday. Tregenza doesn't look fit enough(it was a hot day), can see that he has talent though.
Broadbent their ruckman was given BOG, I don't know how, he played ok, but I thought there were other better. His 17yo ruckman teammate Mitch Edwards was just as good, I reckon he'll go top 5 pick next year.

West Perth's FF Noah Farrow looks promising, kicked 4 goals and moves well, is a Dockers NGA player as is Mitch Edwards. West Perths key defenders Skender and Mouritz were ok.

West Perth had a few midfielders who got a bit of the ball, Bevan got a heap of it but his kicking needs work. I was very impressed with Byron Sherwood, got a fair bit of the ball, kicked a couple of nice goals and tackled his ring out. Julian, Gathercoal and Carraway were good too.

Was impressed with Luke Michael, a good mid sized intercept defender, he got down the ground and kicked a goal.

Peel's Clay Hall, son of Derek who played for the Cats looks a nice type, who used it ok. Other nice types were Wyburd, Tuia, Donaghy, Torrent and Selwood.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

A bit of a fluff piece but I agree with the sentiments, would it be better to wait on Hopper who will be a free agent next year?
Rubbish piece. Absolute fluff.

Draft a key forward, trade for a key forward, and pay 250. Who? How old? You want him ready after one year to take the second forward spot at AFL level. What key forward can play the Jack role after 2 preseasons? Ryan is more advanced and by 2024 will be entering into his fourth preseason and do that exact role.

If you deem someone an A grader, you get them whenever possible. Rather get Hopper now than hope he waits for us next year. Why would he waste a year of his career?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
In terms of talls, were there any from the last couple of drafts that weren't drafted but have done well in secondary competitions?
 
Rubbish piece. Absolute fluff.

Draft a key forward, trade for a key forward, and pay 250. Who? How old? You want him ready after one year to take the second forward spot at AFL level. What key forward can play the Jack role after 2 preseasons? Ryan is more advanced and by 2024 will be entering into his fourth preseason and do that exact role.

If you deem someone an A grader, you get them whenever possible. Rather get Hopper now than hope he waits for us next year. Why would he waste a year of his career?
That's all good and well but the cost most likely to be next year's first, that's not playing the numbers game in my opinion. I mentioned the article because grabbing a player 1 year out from free agency automatically comes at a steep cost, I think the benefits derived from next year will be offset by the opportunity cost of not being a significant player in the 2023 draft. I don't necessarily subscribe to theory it's a super draft but I'd back myself to get an important piece of the puzzle, first rounders should always be the bedrock to any rebuild, not much tradeable capital left either. However you slice & dice it, we're now primarily a Blair Hartley show, definitely edging closer to a Geelong model of list management.
 
That's all good and well but the cost most likely to be next year's first, that's not playing the numbers game in my opinion. I mentioned the article because grabbing a player 1 year out from free agency automatically comes at a steep cost, I think the benefits derived from next year will be offset by the opportunity cost of not being a significant player in the 2023 draft. I don't necessarily subscribe to theory it's a super draft but I'd back myself to get an important piece of the puzzle, first rounders should always be the bedrock to any rebuild, not much tradeable capital left either. However you slice & dice it, we're now primarily a Blair Hartley show, definitely edging closer to a Geelong model of list management.

In 1 year only. Last year we drafted 5 inside 30. Not sure how that equates to the Blair Hartley show. Thats some hyperbole there bullus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
That's all good and well but the cost most likely to be next year's first, that's not playing the numbers game in my opinion. I mentioned the article because grabbing a player 1 year out from free agency automatically comes at a steep cost, I think the benefits derived from next year will be offset by the opportunity cost of not being a significant player in the 2023 draft. I don't necessarily subscribe to theory it's a super draft but I'd back myself to get an important piece of the puzzle, first rounders should always be the bedrock to any rebuild, not much tradeable capital left either. However you slice & dice it, we're now primarily a Blair Hartley show, definitely edging closer to a Geelong model of list management.
When did Geelong have 5 picks in the top 30 ?
 
In 1 year only. Last year we drafted 5 inside 30. Not sure how that equates to the Blair Hartley show. Thats some hyperbole there bullus.
12, 19 & next year's first is a big price to pay in anyone's language, people also forgetting both players come with injury clouds. I'm not seeing a value play, taking 1 player ok under the circumstances but 2 seems like a raid on treasury. Fine if you are sourcing rare parts but not so prudent if you are getting dime a dozen midfielders. If it's not up to Hartley to find some key position talent then Clarke will need to pull out some rabbits in the third round & beyond. The odds of this not too flash if history is a guide.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
12, 19 & next year's first is a big price to pay in anyone's language, people also forgetting both players come with injury clouds. I'm not seeing a value play, taking 1 player ok under the circumstances but 2 seems like a raid on treasury. Fine if you are sourcing rare parts but not so prudent if you are getting dime a dozen midfielders. If it's not up to Hartley to find some key position talent then Clarke will need to pull out some rabbits in the third round & beyond. The odds of this not too flash if history is a guide.
The club obviously doesn’t believe that Taranto and Hopper are dime a dozen midfielders. If it was that easy every club would have gun midfields.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
12, 19 & next year's first is a big price to pay in anyone's language, people also forgetting both players come with injury clouds. I'm not seeing a value play, taking 1 player ok under the circumstances but 2 seems like a raid on treasury. Fine if you are sourcing rare parts but not so prudent if you are getting dime a dozen midfielders. If it's not up to Hartley to find some key position talent then Clarke will need to pull out some rabbits in the third round & beyond. The odds of this not too flash if history is a guide.
Every time we struggled on the field this year it was for the same reason. Every time we got smashed in clearances and around the contest.
I am 100% in favour of Taranto and Hopper and to be honest the price being talked about for 2 high quality midfielders is not that high IMO.
You have the pay to get quality and these are quality footballers
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
12, 19 & next year's first is a big price to pay in anyone's language, people also forgetting both players come with injury clouds. I'm not seeing a value play, taking 1 player ok under the circumstances but 2 seems like a raid on treasury. Fine if you are sourcing rare parts but not so prudent if you are getting dime a dozen midfielders. If it's not up to Hartley to find some key position talent then Clarke will need to pull out some rabbits in the third round & beyond. The odds of this not too flash if history is a guide.

So if dime a dozen midfielders are so easy to get, why have we not drafted any for so long? The last ones that we drafted that were anywhere near the quality of these 2 guys, were Cotch (pick 2) and Dusty (pick 3).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
So if dime a dozen midfielders are so easy to get, why have we not drafted any for so long? The last ones that we drafted that were anywhere near the quality of these 2 guys, were Cotch (pick 2) and Dusty (pick 3).
Every year there are midfield defections, some cheaper than others, Brodie a classic example from last year. I think all this draft capital is being wasted on a plentiful resource, inside midfielders probably the easiest hole to plug from a list management perspective.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Every year there are midfield defections, some cheaper than others, Brodie a classic example from last year. I think all this draft capital is being wasted on a plentiful resource, inside midfielders probably the easiest hole to plug from a list management perspective.
We just have to accept it is happening and move on Bully. History will tell us if it was an astute move or not just like any trade or draft selection. I am not a fan of the seven year contracts but we just have to believe in what the club is doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
That's all good and well but the cost most likely to be next year's first, that's not playing the numbers game in my opinion. I mentioned the article because grabbing a player 1 year out from free agency automatically comes at a steep cost, I think the benefits derived from next year will be offset by the opportunity cost of not being a significant player in the 2023 draft. I don't necessarily subscribe to theory it's a super draft but I'd back myself to get an important piece of the puzzle, first rounders should always be the bedrock to any rebuild, not much tradeable capital left either. However you slice & dice it, we're now primarily a Blair Hartley show, definitely edging closer to a Geelong model of list management.
If Hopper (who it looks like the 2023 1st is linked to) has three good years over the next four, we are ahead of what the first rounder potentially produces, especially a tall.

We should be shifting to a Geelong model, we want to stay in the window, like they have. There’s no other model that has sustained success for so long. If we don’t try and max out premierships with Lynch, Martin, Grimes, Vlastuin, Prestia via Taranto & Hopper, we would bottom out quickly. It’s a lot longer coming back up then going down.

Geelong pivoting now for Henry, Bruhn and Bowes/7 is what we did last year with Gibcus, Banks, Sonsie and Clarke.
You keep swinging between trades and draft. No one model works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
Seven news tonight reckon Tarantino will be done tomorrow for our first two picks. Considering Grasshopper is still contracted and some would say the better midfield bull of the two. Then things might not be very pretty on here soon.
Considering Gee Whizz are supposedly well over the cap n desperately in need of some breathing space, we might seem to b bending over a tad to far for comfort.
 
Seven news tonight reckon Tarantino will be done tomorrow for our first two picks. Considering Grasshopper is still contracted and some would say the better midfield bull of the two. Then things might not be very pretty on here soon.
Considering Gee Whizz are supposedly well over the cap n desperately in need of some breathing space, we might seem to b bending over a tad to far for comfort.