Welcome to Tigerland - Tim Taranto

[bullus_hit]

How am I "moving the goalposts" and "changing the narrative" when all I did was show what the ACTUAL trade was.

I really like your input throughout the BB but you need to be able to accept some level of alternative views. There is no scheme here to get you, all I did was show the trade.

Cooper Stephens is not a part of the Collingwood trade.

They traded Henry, 41 and 50 for Mitchell and 25. Thats cold hard fact. 25 and 41/50 are almost offset by each other (like I said with extra weighting towards Pick 25), so Mitchell (and a lower salary) was essentially traded for Henry and an upgraded pick. Not sure what there is to argue against here.

The trade was won by Collingwood yet you make out they lost, Henry's value roughly a pick in the 15-20 range, they got pick 25 back so Mitchell worth a downgrade of 10 spots at best. Ryan a great pick & a player I would have welcomed at Richmond if the truth be known. This trade should be seen as a future template for effective trading, classic splicing to get an A grade plug and play and replace one promising youngster with another equally talented teenager.

 

[mrposhman]

The trade was won by Collingwood yet you make out they lost, Henry's value roughly a pick in the 15-20 range, they got pick 25 back so Mitchell worth a downgrade of 10 spots at best. Ryan a great pick & a player I would have welcomed at Richmond if the truth be known. This trade should be seen as a future template for effective trading, classic splicing to get an A grade plug and play and replace one promising youngster with another equally talented teenager.

and there you are putting words in my mouth. Show me where I said that Collingwood lost the trade? I haven't said that. I actually think Hawthorn got the rough end of the deal personally. What I was highlighting was that Collingwood didn't get him for chump change which is what you are saying. Even now you say they got Henry and a downgrade of 10 spots at best, yet thats not even true. You are ignoring that they gave up picks to get Pick 25 back.

They gave up BOTH 41 and 50 to get 25. This was an upgrade to their picks, so they gained by this trade, but the other part of the trade was Mitchell for Henry. So essentially the trade was Mitchell for Henry and an upgrade on their picks.

I've not said anything about whether it was the right deal for them (it was) but merely your assumption that a future 3rd would have been enough despite the fact that the ACTUAL trade shows that that assumption is wrong.

Anyway, this is the TT thread and nothing about the Mitchell trade affects what we traded TT for (as we would have done that trade whether we were considering Mitchell anyway).

 

[bullus_hit]

and there you are putting words in my mouth. Show me where I said that Collingwood lost the trade? I haven't said that. I actually think Hawthorn got the rough end of the deal personally. What I was highlighting was that Collingwood didn't get him for chump change which is what you are saying. Even now you say they got Henry and a downgrade of 10 spots at best, yet thats not even true. You are ignoring that they gave up picks to get Pick 25 back.

They gave up BOTH 41 and 50 to get 25. This was an upgrade to their picks, so they gained by this trade, but the other part of the trade was Mitchell for Henry. So essentially the trade was Mitchell for Henry and an upgrade on their picks.

I've not said anything about whether it was the right deal for them (it was) but merely your assumption that a future 3rd would have been enough despite the fact that the ACTUAL trade shows that that assumption is wrong.

Anyway, this is the TT thread and nothing about the Mitchell trade affects what we traded TT for (as we would have done that trade whether we were considering Mitchell anyway).

Hawthorn received chump change for Mitchell, any club could have taken advantage of that situation, you even admit it yourself. Mitchell could have been secured on the cheap, he eventually went cheap and a second rounder would have been sufficient, both Collingwood & Geelong have done well in this instance. This notion that Mitchell cost Henry is also misleading, he didn't, Hawthorn were not the beneficiaries of Henry, Collingwood used him to splice their picks and spread the draft capital. This is a prime example of first class trading from two clubs and one example of a salary cap dump and receiving unders for a former Brownlow medalist.

 

[Scoop]

Hawthorn received chump change for Mitchell, any club could have taken advantage of that situation, you even admit it yourself.

Not true, he only wanted to go to a club that was in the window.

 

[bullus_hit]

Not true, he only wanted to go to a club that was in the window.

Wasn't that the vibe in recruiting Taranto & Hopper? We were bringing them in to give our ageing list one last tilt at glory. Pretty sure it was top 4 as a benchmark for this trade.

Here's evidence of some of the flip flopping coutesy of Leysy

"Are they? Nothing has come from the Pies. Only media.

If your open to listening, Leysy will explain why your theory on targetting Mitchell and Crouch Potato is not aligned (or up with) those currently employed at our club (and nearly, if not all, clubs in the country).

You say Mitchell can deliver what Taranto can next year and keep pumping out stats and such. On just stats he might, but that is only one part of the game. The other is true impact on the scoreboard. Then the other is when your side doesn't have the ball, which you need to watch football to understand.

Transition two-way running is everything now. Richmond, Geelong now, Collingwood, Sydney etc - You can't have purely stoppage to stoppage midfielders in your system. They need to get back and help, then sprint forward and do the same. Hence the Potato and Mitchell are on the outer at their clubs. Conversely Meatball is world class at that balance.

Taranto (and full disclosure would have preferred Dunkley), is an endurance beast. For a big guy he keeps running. Full running numbers are hard to get but in 2021 he averaged 14.36km a game. All our elite runners Graham (14.06) Broad (13.86) Lablett (13.63) Short (13.61) were behind him. Think about that - Leysy has no doubt that was near the number 1 thing that sold Blair and Co's to him.

He's a modern footballer who also has the other massive advantage over Mitchell - size/strength at a stoppage. His physical qualities to block opposition walking out from any type of stoppage is far above Mitchell's.

If the game was played on Footywire Leysy would agree with you BH. But guess what, it ain't.

Leysy's not holding his breathe, but maybe some of that resonates why you're thinking isn't aligned with our (and most) clubs on slow inside mids and is either blinkered, out of date, or both."

And from Spook

"100%. Mitchell and Hewett would have been no man's land."

"If we don't contend this year that doesn't rule us out of contending next year and the year after. The Superhunks will only be better next year, and the year after that, and the year after...while Taranto and Hopper are still in their primes, and Tom Mitchell is coaching in the bush."

"Garbage alright. Absolute made-up crap to fit your persecution complex. There was zero vitriol in what I said. The same can't be said for the p!ssy horsesh!t above. Misrepresenting what others say to claim some moral high ground where you're the injured party and those who point out the huge..."

Some of you have an inability to ever admit error or at least meet half way and see both sides of the argument. It's always big tough talk and personal attacks.

 

[Scoop]

Wasn't that the vibe in recruiting Taranto & Hopper? We were bringing them in to give our ageing list one last tilt at glory. Pretty sure it was top 4 as a benchmark for this trade.

Here's evidence of some of the flip flopping coutesy of Leysy

"Are they? Nothing has come from the Pies. Only media.

If your open to listening, Leysy will explain why your theory on targetting Mitchell and Crouch Potato is not aligned (or up with) those currently employed at our club (and nearly, if not all, clubs in the country).

You say Mitchell can deliver what Taranto can next year and keep pumping out stats and such. On just stats he might, but that is only one part of the game. The other is true impact on the scoreboard. Then the other is when your side doesn't have the ball, which you need to watch football to understand.

Transition two-way running is everything now. Richmond, Geelong now, Collingwood, Sydney etc - You can't have purely stoppage to stoppage midfielders in your system. They need to get back and help, then sprint forward and do the same. Hence the Potato and Mitchell are on the outer at their clubs. Conversely Meatball is world class at that balance.

Taranto (and full disclosure would have preferred Dunkley), is an endurance beast. For a big guy he keeps running. Full running numbers are hard to get but in 2021 he averaged 14.36km a game. All our elite runners Graham (14.06) Broad (13.86) Lablett (13.63) Short (13.61) were behind him. Think about that - Leysy has no doubt that was near the number 1 thing that sold Blair and Co's to him.

He's a modern footballer who also has the other massive advantage over Mitchell - size/strength at a stoppage. His physical qualities to block opposition walking out from any type of stoppage is far above Mitchell's.

If the game was played on Footywire Leysy would agree with you BH. But guess what, it ain't.

Leysy's not holding his breathe, but maybe some of that resonates why you're thinking isn't aligned with our (and most) clubs on slow inside mids and is either blinkered, out of date, or both."

And from Spook

"100%. Mitchell and Hewett would have been no man's land."

"If we don't contend this year that doesn't rule us out of contending next year and the year after. The Superhunks will only be better next year, and the year after that, and the year after...while Taranto and Hopper are still in their primes, and Tom Mitchell is coaching in the bush."

"Garbage alright. Absolute made-up crap to fit your persecution complex. There was zero vitriol in what I said. The same can't be said for the p!ssy horsesh!t above. Misrepresenting what others say to claim some moral high ground where you're the injured party and those who point out the huge..."

Some of you have an inability to ever admit error or at least meet half way and see both sides of the argument. It's always big tough talk and personal attacks.

Bully, I wasn't going into the strategy of Mitchell vs Taranto/Hopper. You said any club could get Mitchell and I counted with ,he was only going to a club in the window. That limited where he could land, I believe and I am not saying it was correct or incorrect because it's far too early to make judgments but the hierarchy of Richmond was deeply advanced in talks with both of the GWS lads, had committed to getting them publicly and couldn't back out.

 

[bullus_hit]

Bully, I wasn't going into the strategy of Mitchell vs Taranto/Hopper. You said any club could get Mitchell and I counted with ,he was only going to a club in the window. That limited where he could land, I believe and I am not saying it was correct or incorrect because it's far too early to make judgments but the hierarchy of Richmond was deeply advanced in talks with both of the GWS lads, had committed to getting them publicly and couldn't back out.

I'm not disputing that, it's entirely accurate but from the RFC president right down to the mug punter on PRE it was premierships & top 4 aspirations. The media also ran with this line, the bookies in on the act, only a handful like Carter dared suggest we might not be top 4 material and could be overrating our list. I'm pretty sure Mitchell was obtainable if he was indeed rated by the club (which clearly he wasn't).

 

[Tigers08]

“Taranto may never see finals” some amateur recruiters on this forum bigger belief. I trust the club in all recruiting matters , rather than some amateur keyboard recruiter on an internet forum. The clubs track record speaks for itself.

 

[TigerFurious]

Don’t listen to the haters 151, you’re doing great.

Also RFC, I’m still waiting on those limited edition Taranto #151 jerseys. I’ll even take a yellow and black #151 cap at this stage.

 

[bullus_hit]

“Taranto may never see finals” some amateur recruiters on this forum bigger belief. I trust the club in all recruiting matters , rather than some amateur keyboard recruiter on an internet forum. The clubs track record speaks for itself.

More personal attacks, the comment was made with a view of the guys about to retire, most of whom are genuine A listers & the players coming through the system. I personally see a talent deficit but clearly that's too much for supporters to stomach. As for the track record of Jackson, his drafting speaks for itself, best recruiter we've had in my lifetime. Jury still out on Clarke, I'm a sceptic but happy to be proven wrong.

 

[mrposhman]

Wasn't that the vibe in recruiting Taranto & Hopper? We were bringing them in to give our ageing list one last tilt at glory. Pretty sure it was top 4 as a benchmark for this trade.

Here's evidence of some of the flip flopping coutesy of Leysy

"Are they? Nothing has come from the Pies. Only media.

If your open to listening, Leysy will explain why your theory on targetting Mitchell and Crouch Potato is not aligned (or up with) those currently employed at our club (and nearly, if not all, clubs in the country).

You say Mitchell can deliver what Taranto can next year and keep pumping out stats and such. On just stats he might, but that is only one part of the game. The other is true impact on the scoreboard. Then the other is when your side doesn't have the ball, which you need to watch football to understand.

Transition two-way running is everything now. Richmond, Geelong now, Collingwood, Sydney etc - You can't have purely stoppage to stoppage midfielders in your system. They need to get back and help, then sprint forward and do the same. Hence the Potato and Mitchell are on the outer at their clubs. Conversely Meatball is world class at that balance.

Taranto (and full disclosure would have preferred Dunkley), is an endurance beast. For a big guy he keeps running. Full running numbers are hard to get but in 2021 he averaged 14.36km a game. All our elite runners Graham (14.06) Broad (13.86) Lablett (13.63) Short (13.61) were behind him. Think about that - Leysy has no doubt that was near the number 1 thing that sold Blair and Co's to him.

He's a modern footballer who also has the other massive advantage over Mitchell - size/strength at a stoppage. His physical qualities to block opposition walking out from any type of stoppage is far above Mitchell's.

If the game was played on Footywire Leysy would agree with you BH. But guess what, it ain't.

Leysy's not holding his breathe, but maybe some of that resonates why you're thinking isn't aligned with our (and most) clubs on slow inside mids and is either blinkered, out of date, or both."

And from Spook

"100%. Mitchell and Hewett would have been no man's land."

"If we don't contend this year that doesn't rule us out of contending next year and the year after. The Superhunks will only be better next year, and the year after that, and the year after...while Taranto and Hopper are still in their primes, and Tom Mitchell is coaching in the bush."

"Garbage alright. Absolute made-up crap to fit your persecution complex. There was zero vitriol in what I said. The same can't be said for the p!ssy horsesh!t above. Misrepresenting what others say to claim some moral high ground where you're the injured party and those who point out the huge..."

Some of you have an inability to ever admit error or at least meet half way and see both sides of the argument. It's always big tough talk and personal attacks.

I don't see how anything that Leysy or Spook have said in those clips is wrong.

Taranto IS a massive running machine, we've seen that first hand. He IS a very important cog in our defensive aspect of our gameplan due to his 2 way running.
Comparing TT and Mitchell in SC scores and stats probably would look like a similar comparison, but you replace Taranto with Mitchell in our midfield and people would be saying Mitchell was finished. He wouldn't be having the same impact as TT or the impact that he is having at the Pies because he is playing a different role.

At the Pies Mitchell has Crisp and Adams in those similar roles, so he plays a role that doesn't require him to do as much defensive running. He would be similar to Hopper in our team but you love to compare him to TT. Taranto is a far more important player to our team than stats alone show, as he is a key cog in breaking down opposition attacks in a very similar way to what Prestia has done since 2017.

Its not that WE can't see both sides of the argument. You are making the wrong argument. It should never have been a comparison between TT and Mitchell, the only real argument is Mitchell or Hopper but you aren't making that argument, you constantly bring it back to TT, yet both he and Mitchell play vastly different roles. Nothing personal in terms of an attack but you are consistently making the wrong argument. Your argument may be sound if you include Hopper and then its Mitchell for a couple of years or pay more and get Hopper for 7, but to keep bringing this back to TT suggests that you aren't really sure of the point you are making as you aren't even comparing 2 players that play the same role. Mitchell has NEVER played the role that TT has at any of the clubs he has played.

 

[bullus_hit]

I don't see how anything that Leysy or Spook have said in those clips is wrong.

Taranto IS a massive running machine, we've seen that first hand. He IS a very important cog in our defensive aspect of our gameplan due to his 2 way running.
Comparing TT and Mitchell in SC scores and stats probably would look like a similar comparison, but you replace Taranto with Mitchell in our midfield and people would be saying Mitchell was finished. He wouldn't be having the same impact as TT or the impact that he is having at the Pies because he is playing a different role.

At the Pies Mitchell has Crisp and Adams in those similar roles, so he plays a role that doesn't require him to do as much defensive running. He would be similar to Hopper in our team but you love to compare him to TT. Taranto is a far more important player to our team than stats alone show, as he is a key cog in breaking down opposition attacks in a very similar way to what Prestia has done since 2017.

Its not that WE can't see both sides of the argument. You are making the wrong argument. It should never have been a comparison between TT and Mitchell, the only real argument is Mitchell or Hopper but you aren't making that argument, you constantly bring it back to TT, yet both he and Mitchell play vastly different roles. Nothing personal in terms of an attack but you are consistently making the wrong argument. Your argument may be sound if you include Hopper and then its Mitchell for a couple of years or pay more and get Hopper for 7, but to keep bringing this back to TT suggests that you aren't really sure of the point you are making as you aren't even comparing 2 players that play the same role. Mitchell has NEVER played the role that TT has at any of the clubs he has played.

You can read whatever you want to read, Leysy thought Mitchell was past it and on the nose with every club in the AFL, that's clear, now it's Mitchell was unobtainable. This is a prime example of shifting the goal posts.

Spook was talking premierships in February & now it's Mitchell only wanted a top 4 contender. You can't have it both ways but I've learnt that PRE doesn't operate with any level of humility & certainly lacks any humble commentary. Some posters like Scoop possess these qualities, Leysy & Spook have difficulty conceding ground and quickly reframe the argument to suit their agenda. Beyond that it's personal attacks.

As for me being anti Taranto, I'm not but I would have preferred to keep the picks and plump for a cheap plug and play. I was happy to trade future picks but not a future first & I was against Hopper on the grounds he was coming back from injury and we stood some chance of slipping out of the 8. When assessing these trades much will depend on future finals action, if we're mired in that 9-15 range over the next few years I'd say it's been an exercise in middling. If we can regenerate with Taranto & Hopper leading us to a successful finals campaign then different story. Prior to the commencement of the season most felt top 4 was a fair and reasonable line in the sand, not so much now & I really do question whether Taranto & Hopper will see finals action over the next few years. This is not a blight on our 30+ crowd but more a comment on those replacing the likes of Jack, Cotch, Prestia, Lynch, Grimes, Tarrant, Pickett & Dusty.

 

[Tigers08]

More personal attacks, the comment was made with a view of the guys about to retire, most of whom are genuine A listers & the players coming through the system. I personally see a talent deficit but clearly that's too much for supporters to stomach. As for the track record of Jackson, his drafting speaks for itself, best recruiter we've had in my lifetime. Jury still out on Clarke, I'm a sceptic but happy to be proven wrong.

Nothing personal. Just an opinion.

 

[mrposhman]

You can read whatever you want to read, Leysy thought Mitchell was past it and on the nose with every club in the AFL, that's clear, now it's Mitchell was unobtainable. This is a prime example of shifting the goal posts.

Spook was talking premierships in February & now it's Mitchell only wanted a top 4 contender. You can't have it both ways but I've learnt that PRE doesn't operate with any level of humility & certainly lacks any humble commentary. Some posters like Scoop possess these qualities, Leysy & Spook have difficulty conceding ground and quickly reframe the argument to suit their agenda. Beyond that it's personal attacks.

As for me being anti Taranto, I'm not but I would have preferred to keep the picks and plump for a cheap plug and play. I was happy to trade future picks but not a future first & I was against Hopper on the grounds he was coming back from injury and we stood some chance of slipping out of the 8. When assessing these trades much will depend on future finals action, if we're mired in that 9-15 range over the next few years I'd say it's been an exercise in middling. If we can regenerate with Taranto & Hopper leading us to a successful finals campaign then different story. Prior to the commencement of the season most felt top 4 was a fair and reasonable line in the sand, not so much now & I really do question whether Taranto & Hopper will see finals action over the next few years. This is not a blight on our 30+ crowd but more a comment on those replacing the likes of Jack, Cotch, Prestia, Lynch, Grimes, Tarrant, Pickett & Dusty.

Ok I see which bits of the posts you were commenting on, was a bit difficult to pick out which bits with the amount of text there was there.

Though my point still stands, you are mixing TT and Hopper up and mashing both trades into 1, when they were 2 entirely different trades.

TT was Pick 14 and 23 in last years draft, no future picks, so you need to assess that trade on those picks and in anyones book (aside from Cornes) and thats a big win for us IMO. The role he plays is way different to the ones you've brought up in the plug and play mode, and this is where your argument falls down.

Your argument should be not with TT, but with the Hopper trade. Essentially playing the same role that the 2 plug and plays that you raised (Mitchell and Crouch) and obviously cost more (including the future pick that you speak about). The argument is around the cost differential in the picks vs quality and longevity, but you keep bringing TT into this conversation which completely denigrates your point as talking about the future 1st and TT is wrong as the trade never included a future pick so they are 2 completely different points.

 

[Cooper O'Reilly]

Seriously, can you lot take your squabbling to another thread. Having to scroll through the same argument page after page when all I want to do is read about Taranto is bloody annoying.

 

[Tig3]

Seriously, can you lot take your squabbling to another thread. Having to scroll through the same argument page after page when all I want to do is read about Taranto is bloody annoying.

Amen!! I said this yesterday. Please guys, for gods sake, you can bicker back and forth to your hearts content in a private chat or something, just take it out of this thread. It’s ridiculous and completely over the top. The trades have been made, that was the direction the club went, nothing anyone says in here will change the fact that we made those trades and went in that direction, so deal with it and get on with supporting our current Tigers on the list. End of story

 

[bullus_hit]

Ok I see which bits of the posts you were commenting on, was a bit difficult to pick out which bits with the amount of text there was there.

Though my point still stands, you are mixing TT and Hopper up and mashing both trades into 1, when they were 2 entirely different trades.

TT was Pick 14 and 23 in last years draft, no future picks, so you need to assess that trade on those picks and in anyones book (aside from Cornes) and thats a big win for us IMO. The role he plays is way different to the ones you've brought up in the plug and play mode, and this is where your argument falls down.

Your argument should be not with TT, but with the Hopper trade. Essentially playing the same role that the 2 plug and plays that you raised (Mitchell and Crouch) and obviously cost more (including the future pick that you speak about). The argument is around the cost differential in the picks vs quality and longevity, but you keep bringing TT into this conversation which completely denigrates your point as talking about the future 1st and TT is wrong as the trade never included a future pick so they are 2 completely different points.

Well, that's not entirely correct because it was basically a basket of players and how to maximise our returns. My point at the time was better to spend a future second on Mitchell than spend pick 14 & 23 on Taranto, this was in response to the issue of clearances. You could have come up with a number permutations, mixing and matching to get the right blend of players. But you are correct, the cost of Taranto not nearly as dicey as the potential cost of Hopper. Will it be a win for the RFC? Depends on finals, who we pick with the second rounder I threw up as trade bait & the progress of Steely Green & Kaleb Smith, all those guys need to be accounted for & I will keep an open mind. For what it's worth I think Tim has responded well to the antics of Cornes, not being in the top 150 is quite ridiculous. He's still a first round talent, I think when we redid the 2016 draft I had him ranked at 7.

 

[Tig3]

 

[forward press]

Why are people getting their back up over Mitchell again? And in this thread? So strange.

He was never an option for us.
He chose Collingwood and we were never in the mix.

 

[tiger76]

Seriously, can you lot take your squabbling to another thread. Having to scroll through the same argument page after page when all I want to do is read about Taranto is bloody annoying.

I agree with you, but at the same time I want to respond by saying, 'welcome to the internet'.

I deal with some of the fighting, mud slinging; misplaced arrogance and inability to let something slide by certain posters by imagining the person on the other end to be either 15 or 65.

(No offence to any 65+ posters who have been sucked into an online beef)*