PASS PASS PASS

[damnfinee]

does anyone know the height or anything about our first rookie pick in Kelvin Moore.

why pass last couple of picks- when the amount does not go into the cap.  Why not pick up a tall like McGhie or Butler who played for Coburg last year - it is hard to follow their thinking - they are full on just picking guys tried at other clubs for short term fixers.

because they are idiots..maybe shir is worth a punt but adam pickering ffs..
kelvin moore is from yarra valley anglican college so it looks like he isn't even from an u18 club?
we could have used pick 3 on a fairly decent player overlooked in the main draft and picked up this guy later...

 

[Rampaging Richo]

The short term fix was okay for the national draft, but for the rookie draft why not pick up kids such as McGhie and see how develop in the system???

What has happened to Kristian De Pasquale? He is one guy who can play - even though he hurt his knee late in 2002.

 

[Koalalill]

It seems that our draft (not our trades) selections leave us with more questions answers.

But I agree with you Damnfinee - some staggering choices to say the least.

But let me repeat Matt Shir is my "WIP" project for 2003 - I will keep you all posted

But for now it is Xmas break up party time

I believe Kristian will not be available for alot of 2003 but will probably be on Coburgs list for season 2003 but I will try and confirm

 

[julzqld]

Rampaging Richo - love the name

 

[damnfinee]

theres a guy on tiger talk who has good knowledge of young players and heres what he had to say
> 3. Richmond - Kelvin Moore (Yarra Valley Anglican School)

Very, very raw key position player, mostly as a defender. Played in
the Private School system. Is a little from left field and is only
known because he played in a game between the two main school leagues
here in Melbourne and so his name got known. Only saw him in that one
game and can't say he impressed, wouldn't have had more than 15
minutes. Must have trained well.

> 19. Richmond - Matthew Shir (Adelaide)

Half-back flanker, has AFL experience and has been training with us.
Is a back-up in the Torney -type role. Should be a solid choice.

> 35. Richmond - Adam Pickering (Carlton)

Why bother. Pickering is ex-Calder. Is a 185cm full forward in the
style of Terry Keays. Has been around for a while now. Would have
prefered a genuine rookie.

plus

> 7. Hawthorn - Brad Sewell (North Ballarat)

This kid can flat out play. A good hard at it onballer who I realy
like, surprised he wasn't drafted.

as well as some other young guys he thought were ok so again why draft some unkown at 3?? pick up someone like this sewell kid at 3 and get moore in stead of pickering *sigh*

 

[tigertrue]

I think you're right Koalalill, Matthew Shir seems a good pick-up for the rookie draft,
lets hope it's a gamble that pays off - after all there is nothing to lose is there?!

: Shir, 21, played 11 matches in two seasons for Adelaide – five in 2001, six in 2002 – from Murray Bushrangers under 18s - taken with pick 83 at the 1999 national draft.

And it was odd that the Bulldogs didn't take a rookie, though they have apparently retained one in Mark Boyd.

 

[Rampaging_Richo]

A bit of a joke really

Why would you pick an absolute Neville Nobody as your number 1 rookie, when there is clearly some quality kids floating around.

In all reality, Mr Moore will be so far off being ready for this level as he would have only played school footy where 2 training sessions of an hour a week is considered a HEAVY workload, and the gym is seen only whilst walking to the tuckshop

The whole point of TAC Cup is so these kids get used to what will be expected of them if they get drafted, and they can prepare their bodies for the torture of AFL.

I have a feeling this kid will be a footnote in AFL failures in the same ilk of the legendary Richard Lounder.

But I would be happy to be proved wrong :-/

 

[TigersGoddess]

Can't have been very exciting I slept through both ;D

 

[mightytiges]

MT - I understand what you are saying about the rookie salaries not being included but I just think if we can afford a full list + rookies then that is what we should have done.

And I am not happy about passing twice in the rookie draft. Take 2 more taller rookies eg McGhie and see how they go for Coburg and then if they stand out we have first option on them at the end of 2003 for 2004. Teams are allowed to promote from the rookie draft prior to the national draft if they choose

Don't disagree with what you're saying Koalalill. Just trying to come up with a reason why we passed. We were allowed to have picked up 1 player from the pre-season draft and 5 rookies but instead only got 3 rookies and no spare talls . Hope we've got a spare Gas or Dutchy in the backshed behind Punt Road to roll out if one of them gets injured or the likes of Doyle, Bandy, Graham etc will again kick goals against us :-/. At the moment with Dutchy out injured til round 5 we don't have a CHB.

 

[mightytiges]

From afl.com.au

Richmond football manager Greg Hutchison said the Tigers were disappointed not to be able to secure Bolton but simply couldn't fit him in under the salary cap.

"We had enough room to take a player at the minimum payment but there wasn't a player out there that we were interested in enough to put on our list", Hutchison said.

"He (Bolton) put $80,000 on his head so we wouldn't have been able to fit him in."

"He's a good player and he would have helped us but our information from Ken Wood (the AFL's investigations officer) was we could only take a player at the minimum wage and because Bolton had put a figure on his head we just couldn't take him."

 

[mightytiges]

Although Shir would have been on only the minimum amount if he was drafted, that might explain why he was chosen as a rookie. To make sure we were under the cap.

 

[Tigerdog]

Tigerdog throws his arms in the air and with a perplexed look on his face cries"oh my GOD u guys!! what have we done"??????
I just agree with most of what you all already said.
Cant stop shakin my head in disbelief.
Ok so we now understand why they passed but.... and I hate to harp on it........ why no talls????? Ones that are close to playing that is....... or even just some standout kids????? :'(
Adam Pickering hmmm i think someone said ffs... i tend to agree.. anyone know how many games he played at Crapton?? any stats besides height and weight?




Am glad about Matty Shir though if nothing else I got a feeling he is gonna be good for us when he gets his chance.
Also happy to see Ezra and Haynes get given another go.... go well men!

 

[PMac]

I'll start by saying that like pretty much everybody here I'm utterly confused by our draft behaviour. Its so left field this year I cant say its bad because I just dont get it.

But. Instead of just adding another :-/ to the board I'll have a stab at what Beck et al may have been thinking.

1. We came 14th in 02 with some serious deficiencies in our team structure. Any move to a flag would require a major rebuild.

2. As was widely touted this years draft pool (with the exception of the top 3 picks) was considered pretty shallow so trading was a priority.

3. We did ok in trading but that left us with a really tight cap so we were going to have to go short in the national draft and leave enough room under the cap in case something came up in the pre-season. (probably with an eye to Carlton's problems).

4. Nothing great shook out of Carlton for the preseason draft and the remaining players werent good enough to risk cap pressure so we passed to the rookies.

5. So, the tigers come to the rookie draft already considering that this years youngsters didnt look that promising anyway and with three empty slots on the senior list. Those empty slots mean that with just a few injuries you could need rookies to play quite a few senior games so we'd better go for guys able to step up in 03 if needed (Shir and Pickering) while for forms sake we balance these two with a genuine rookie still at school.

In conclusion, My guess is that the tigers are aiming to move up the ladder into the bottom half of the 8 and hope for the best in the finals. Our drafts this year seem designed largely to hold the team together until 04 when a number of mediorce players on long contracts run out, some costs from previous years drop off the cap screen and some overpriced contracts come up for renewal.

 

[Koalalill]

I understand why they didn't take Bolton. What we all expected it once he put a price on his head (a figure most probably devised by Sydney and Bolton).

But not to take all the rookies we could I find really hard to take (a few talls would have been a nice change) but...... hopefully next season come trade and draft time (or 2004 as suggested by PMac) we will go after some decent young talent.

I am already hoping that Chris Judd from the Weagles gets homesick and press hard to get a player like him after the 2003 season. Hey it's nearly Christmas and we can all dream

 

[Tigerdog]

So how could we afford Lappin???????????????????

 

[admin]

So how could we afford Lappin???????????????????

The mind boggles. It seems that either we expected Lappin to play for the base salary, or that we could never have afforded him in the first place and it was a bit of a mind game.
Guess we'll never know.
I'm just relieved they didn't risk salary cap troubles.
We should be in a lot better position at the end of next season.
Most big contracts have been taken care of, and we'll offload a few players who are probably only here now due to the safety net of their contract.
We'll also have a couple or players qualify as vererans.
There should be a lot more room to move and we should see deficiencies in the team addressed and the future success of the club planned for.
That's the theory anyway, ha........

 

[PMac]

Given our cap tightness a few, myself included, have been wondering how we could have made a bid for Lappin.

I suspect we offered him a three year deal with a pretty heavy loading on years two and three.

 

[Koalalill]

Ah yes Lappin - I forgot about him a 3 year deal wasn't it?

I would suspect it was one of those stupid back loaded contracts they talk about. You know the ones - first year low $ but by year 3 some obscence number that leaves us all choking :-/

You would have thought that these clubs in the AFL would now realise that contracts like those are the reason they are ALL having so much trouble with salary cap.

 

[Rampaging_Richo]

To break down 2003 and beyond, next year we will offload blokes like Biddiscombe, Rogers, Cameron, Houlihan. We will get back David Bourke's $200K ??? ??? that we are paying so he can cool his heels by the Murray River (Take a bow Mark Brayshaw). Duncan Kellaway onto the Vet's list (or Richo if the Vet rule is amended as many believe) and you will see a lot of money being freed up for 2004 +.

Also assume that the days of guaranteed contracts of $600k are over and that Otto's next contract will be favoured towards performance (He deserves the $$$ but would prefer it if he earned it taking 12 grabs and slotting 4 goals a game)

One point - with the hindsight of 2002, why wouldn't we take Ricky Mott in the draft (rookie or preseason) as an insurance policy. Now he is not a great player but 199cm 105kg monsters don't fall off trees..

 

[admin]

One point - with the hindsight of 2002, why wouldn't we take Ricky Mott in the draft (rookie or preseason) as an insurance policy.  Now he is not a great player but 199cm 105kg monsters don't fall off trees..

I wondered about this on a previous post RR, not going by Mott's form to date, but taking a gamble on the fact that big men can be late developing.

It's also interesting that noone took Lucas McGie. Robbie was trying to dig up an extra game for himself with the Dogs so Lucas could go there under the father son, and they didn't take him as a rookie either.