Our monster offer for Pick 1 | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • If you are having trouble logging in to the forum please contact [email protected] // When reseting your password or awaiting confirmation please check that your email is correct and also your junk/spam emails.
  • IMPORTANT! Our inbox is full of email errors from members who have not updated their emails, please follow the instructions on how to update here
  • 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.

Our monster offer for Pick 1

Carter

Tiger Legend
Nov 14, 2012
6,980
2,968
Been thinking about this one. Why did we do it?

Picks 7,15,26 and CCJ.

Horne-Francis will be a plug’n’play, we know that.

We also know we’re loading up for another tilt.

And everyone knows we are thin and vulnerable in the midfield.

Now that North have knocked us back, are there any other levers we can pull?

Will there be a ready-made at pick 7(9)?

Will it be down to shooting the lights out of the national and rookie drafts?

Or can we cover for our midfield weakness from within?
 

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
14,229
6,000
Camberwell
Been thinking about this one. Why did we do it?

Picks 7,15,26 and CCJ.

Horne-Francis will be a plug’n’play, we know that.

We also know we’re loading up for another tilt.

And everyone knows we are thin and vulnerable in the midfield.

Now that North have knocked us back, are there any other levers we can pull?

Will there be a ready-made at pick 7(9)?

Will it be down to shooting the lights out of the national and rookie drafts?

Or can we cover for our midfield weakness from within?
I think it is also "did we do it as reported?" There is no doubt we made an offer but I am sceptical that what is reported is what the offer was.
Blair Hartley confirmed that we made an offer but was definitely not confirming the details. Maybe we wanted something coming back? Who knows.
90% of what is written about "offers" is BS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

Carter

Tiger Legend
Nov 14, 2012
6,980
2,968
Whtever the offer is they must think the hyphen is pretty special. Time will tell if he is or not of course.

Our reported offer was massive, ToO.

If true, we are desperate to build our next flag(s) around a bona-fide superstar.

Goes back to the argument that we are at least one elite short.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

wayne

Tiger Legend
May 7, 2007
5,750
509
Traralgon
Reckon we were going to trade it back to Adelaide.

Pick 1 for 4 this year, Adelaide and Melbournes 2022 firsts.

Then maybe try to trade the future firsts back into this year.

Adelaide's future 1st for one of Freo's first rounders, and Melbourne's (with sweeteners) for the Saints' first.

Could have turned 7, 15 and 26 into 4, 6 and 9.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users

The Mole

Tiger Superstar
Apr 1, 2003
2,316
951
Reckon were were going to trade it back to Adelaide.

Pick 1 for 4 this year, Adelaide and Melbournes 2022 firsts.

Then maybe try to trade the future firsts back into this year.

Adelaide's future 1st for one of Freo's first rounders, and Melbourne's (with sweeteners) for the Saints' first.

Could have turned 7, 15 and 26 into 4, 6 and 9.
I like your thinking!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Tigers of Old

Proud of our Club.
Jul 26, 2004
70,395
15,216
www.redbubble.com
Our reported offer was massive, ToO.

If true, we are desperate to build our next flag(s) around a bona-fide superstar.

Goes back to the argument that we are at least one elite short.
I've never really been into the kids but after hearing about our offer I had to go & watch this kid's highlights real to see what the buzz was all about. Reminded me of a young Ablett Snr.:oops:
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 2 users

year of the tiger

Tiger Legend
Mar 26, 2008
8,077
3,412
Tasmania
does anyone still need points?

edit: collingwood do!

Collingwood now have picks 36, 38, 40, 46, 48, 55, 58, 78 and 79.

Now I know it doesn’t work like this but there comes a point where one player can’t be worth so many picks - surely

previous players picked at
36 Sam Mitchell - Hawks
38 Cameron Ling - Cats
40 Mick O'Loughlin (303 games, 521 goals) and Luke Parker (195 games) - plus Jobe Watson
46 David King and Ben Stratton
48 Darren Milburn and Austin Jones
55 Robbie Gray (2006), Chris Newman (2000), Sam Fisher (2003) and Ryan Crowley (2002).
58 Dane Swan (257 games)
78 Richie Vandenberg (Hawks)
79 James Hird

Just saying - I can’t see how getting one player in this draft helps a side in rebuild mode - putting all your eggs in 1 basket is such a risky strategy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

daniel30

Tiger Superstar
Jun 14, 2010
1,233
1,206
Good move we control now 26, 27 ,28 don't forget we have 2 second rounders next year also and our first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

123cups

Tiger Champion
May 1, 2016
2,578
2,529
It all hinges on the value of those top picks, which is an interesting subjective debate.

It seems to me those Cotchin/Martin types only come from the top 3 picks. They’re also proven to be central for allowing great teams to go all the way (who didn’t see Petracca at Melbourne coming?). And you can’t replace them any other way.

How have clubs accessed top talent in the past? Did it work?

To get that talent, you can tank and spoil the other 95% of your list with a loser’s culture. You can trade for it later, but then you only have access to a limited number of lower character options and they cost too much. Or you can pay overs to get the picks while you keep winning (but usually you don’t have the draft hand to take this option).

I remember hearing we’ve looked at how past dynasty clubs have replenished their lists, and we’re taking bits and pieces from each of them. But have any of those clubs succeeded in their strategy? Have any of them been in a position to pay overs for top 3 draft talent while they’re still competitive?

All up, we are a dynasty club who is still in a competitive position while also having the strongest draft hand. It’s the only option that serves us both now and in the future.

Dynasty club. Still good. Strongest draft hand.

Why wouldn’t we aggressively pay overs for a top draft pick this year?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

TigerPort

Tiger Superstar
Jun 29, 2006
1,882
1,283
NSW
3 pick away for 1 pick is that wise!

We had 6 picks with 5 open spots (after rookie adjustments). So to deal 30 and 40 makes sense.

Throwing the future 3rd in remains to be proven. Most likely needed to do that to beat off other offers. We could also be looking at a free agent next year and given salary cap space is at a premium right now we might not be able to make more than 3 picks in the draft next year and we already have our first and second rounders plus Norf's second

Won't really be able to rate this move until next years. By the we will have forgotten this year as there will be more shiny bright things taking our attention.
 

Carter

Tiger Legend
Nov 14, 2012
6,980
2,968
It all hinges on the value of those top picks, which is an interesting subjective debate.

It seems to me those Cotchin/Martin types only come from the top 3 picks. They’re also proven to be central for allowing great teams to go all the way (who didn’t see Petracca at Melbourne coming?). And you can’t replace them any other way.

How have clubs accessed top talent in the past? Did it work?

To get that talent, you can tank and spoil the other 95% of your list with a loser’s culture. You can trade for it later, but then you only have access to a limited number of lower character options and they cost too much. Or you can pay overs to get the picks while you keep winning (but usually you don’t have the draft hand to take this option).

I remember hearing we’ve looked at how past dynasty clubs have replenished their lists, and we’re taking bits and pieces from each of them. But have any of those clubs succeeded in their strategy? Have any of them been in a position to pay overs for top 3 draft talent while they’re still competitive?

All up, we are a dynasty club who is still in a competitive position while also having the strongest draft hand. It’s the only option that serves us both now and in the future.

Dynasty club. Still good. Strongest draft hand.

Why wouldn’t we aggressively pay overs for a top draft pick this year?

yeah good post.

the question is indeed around securing a top 3 pick whilst still in contention.

if only GC or GWS held that Pick 1 instead of desperate, belligerent NMFC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Carter

Tiger Legend
Nov 14, 2012
6,980
2,968
We had 6 picks with 5 open spots (after rookie adjustments). So to deal 30 and 40 makes sense.

Throwing the future 3rd in remains to be proven. Most likely needed to do that to beat off other offers. We could also be looking at a free agent next year and given salary cap space is at a premium right now we might not be able to make more than 3 picks in the draft next year and we already have our first and second rounders plus Norf's second

Won't really be able to rate this move until next years. By the we will have forgotten this year as there will be more shiny bright things taking our attention.

i was a bit iffy about giving away that future third rounder (hate giving away futures as a rule) but in hindsight it seems an equitable trade provided we rate the top 30 of this year's pool.