Traded David Rodan to Melbourne for Pick 88

[timthefish]

rodan was seen as a chancy pickup when richmond originally drafted him. many gave him no chance of playing a game. when port picked him up, many openly laughed as he was seen to be gorn and an indicator of desparation from club sliding back into the basket.

he may not play a big game for melbourne, but he will show some of the remaining underachievers what kind of effort is required to even deserve to be on the park. one of my favourite players in the past decade.

 

[bing181]

he may not play a big game for melbourne, but he will show some of the remaining underachievers what kind of effort is required to even deserve to be on the park. one of my favourite players in the past decade.

Why is it an opposition supporter can see so clearly what a number of Melbourne supporters (who should know better) can't?

Great summary.

 

[stewie griffen]

he may not play a big game for melbourne, but he will show some of the remaining underachievers what kind of effort is required to even deserve to be on the park. one of my favourite players in the past decade.

I love DRod, but lets face it, he can't sustain his efforts for 4 quarters consistently, so I really dont get why Melbourne would pick him up.

 

[Tulip]

Good luck to Rodan, seems like a really likeable bloke from all reports and he will give his all.

Interesting to see the difference in approaches to this trade period from Melbourne and my club.

Melbourne have injected some players in the twilight of their career who will no doubt get games and contribute in rodan and Byrnes and will clearly improve in the short term and will bring other benefits such as culture change, but will it be at the expense of getting game time into kids? I only question their value as it is clear Melbourne won't be challenging for a flag for a number of years, i would have thought they would be better for teams on the brink of success.

The dogs have added some players around the 21/22 year old mark who are unknown, and seem hell bent on mainly developing from the draft, no doubt we are in for some more short term pain than the dees, but long term it may be beneficial getting game time into the kids. On the other hand getting flogged every week may do long term damage to the kids.

Who knows what is right and wrong. Interesting the different approaches. Father time will tell us the answer.

Its because our core group of talent is in its early 20's and yours is in its 30s.

 

[Dogs Rule]

you idiot, we have the third youngest list in the AFL, and suddenly its a shit idea to trade some senior players in. ok, good luck getting games into kids and hoping it works out... it worked well for Bailey

Love stirring the pot. All in good fun.

 

[Zeno The Great]

Love stirring the pot. All in good fun.

i read now that we have the 3rd youngest squad in the league after the trade period went from 5th oldest to 3rd youngest...wow

 

[TradeDraft]

The Dees have become Dad's Army. Obviously have little or no faith in their kids.

They De-Listed most of there Kids

 

[LouisCK]

a hypothetical question for all.

so its draft day its late in the draft and the eyes have been picked out of it. you have pick 88.
do you take a very skinny 18yo kid who who will likely take two or three yrs to beef up enough to play a game. hes shown some good glimpses but has slipped so far because he has some glaring deficiencies in his game that may or may not be fixable. hes part of a group of kids around pick 88 where the stats tell us its more likely than not he will never play a game.

or do you take a punt on a bloke like kyle martin had an extremely good yr in the vfl has all the right physical attributes to play afl but hes not 18 hes 22.
or do you take a player at 29 like rodan who you know will play games will perform a role for you and you know you will get some sort of return from him
me im happy to do the last two scenarios. its about balance for me.
if we took 3 mature players one with 88 and two rookies, id like us to balance that out with two or three 18 yo rookies who have a bit to work with.
if you need some immediate depth mature players will give it to you. its all about the cost.

there is absolutely nothing wrong with what melbourne are doing the process is right. they are taking quality kids with good early picks and they are adding depth and experience with very late picks.
we argue about the quality of players like dawes and weather he was worth giving pick 13 for him but in the main the process is right dawes aside. i say dawes aside because i believe pick 13 to be very valuable and dawes not worth it. but hey i could end up with egg on my face.

nearly every single club is guilty of overlooking mature and state league recruits because they are fixated on 18 yr olds.
with f/a they cost nothing but their wages. late nd and rookie they come at minimal cost.

seems to me good recruiting is a balance of all options available to you.

Good post but Dawes wasn't nabbed for pick 13. Effectively it was pick 13 for Dawes and Barry (who could have gone anywhere in the second or third round), and pick 3 for Hogan.

Not a bad return for the Tom Scully departure.

 

[bing181]

Good post but Dawes wasn't nabbed for pick 13. Effectively it was pick 13 for Dawes and Barry (who could have gone anywhere in the second or third round), and pick 3 for Hogan.

True, though it was effectively pick 14 - everyone suspected that the Goddard pick would come in at 13.

In reality, we've used our 3 high first round picks to get 3 players rated as high first round picks - PLUS Dawes.

And let's not overlook Dom Barry in this:

"Adding to his top-three 3km ranking, Barry was equal ninth in the shuttle run (level 14.2), had a third-best score in the kicking test and was top-10 in the running vertical jump (84cm) and repeat sprints (25.19 seconds)."

Sure, seen it all before, but elite endurance, elite kicking and can jump and sprint. Great place to start, and having guys like Rodan and Byrnes alongside will help him learn how to get the best out of himself.

 

[Demonsterative]

To the dees posters, serious question, i just wonder what your trade team's plan was for the week just appears to me there was no consistent approach. You were trading out young players, middle aged, older players and brought in some very older players and used draft picks to get Viney and Hogan and a couple of middle aged players in Dawes and Pedersen. Just doesn't ring to me like there was a plan other than to get in anyone who is available who may improve the team.

I think undoubtedly you will improve more than my team next year, but don't some of you think some of the trades were looking to the short term rather than the long term, i would have thought guys like Rodan, Byrnes and Pedersen would be picked up by teams on the brink of success.

Interested to hear your thoughts as in all honest i was happy that the dogs stuck traded in younger players and appear to be trying to build a team capable of challenging seriously in 4-5 years even though we will get spanked in the short term.

I dont think ppl outside of the club fully understand the drafting and trading strategy of the club Hang Dog. The club is in a transition period with a complete over haul of its Football Dept 12 months ago. Elite Performance is the buzz word the club is using and that extends to fitness, recruitment and club culture. The coaching, fitness and recruiting depts have been turned over in the last 12 months

I read other supporters laughing at the clubs new recruits believing the club should be drafting young talent to the club. The fact is the club has been doing this for the last 6 years. We dont need to go for young talent only like the Bullies, weve been doing this for too long without result.

So far this trade period we have secured 3 top 7 draft picks. We have pick 4, Hogan who is widely seen as a top 5 pick and Viney was taken by PA at pick 7 in the father son draft. Some had Viney higher. We started with Pick 3, 4 and 13. I see the club has up graded their top draft picks whilst adding Dawes and Barry.

Our list was the second youngest in the comp this year. We had too many 18 to 23 year olds and not enough older players to develop the youth. Our captains are very young too. We lost many older players with Moloney, Rivers, Green, Jurrah. All players who did not add a great deal of leadership or positive culture. Brynes, Pederson, Dawes and Rodan replace the 4 i mentioned but come in with great leadership, work ethic that will provide alot more than on field presence and they add to the clubs development model.

If 6 years of drafting young talent only didnt work, why keep going down that track. We dont have the older players for the youngs one to learn off. The club is changing this issue with our new recruits.

 

[stewie griffen]

We dont have the older players for the youngs one to learn off. The club is changing this issue with our new recruits.

I don't dispute it if that is indeed what you are trying to do, I just question if Chris Dawes and David Rodan are blokes you want anyone to be learning anything off.

 

[Demonsterative]

Dawes has been described as a Solid Citizen by all. Not sure why you would question this? I'm not sure of Rodan myself but trust the club to do the right thing

 

[sr36]

I don't dispute it if that is indeed what you are trying to do, I just question if Chris Dawes and David Rodan are blokes you want anyone to be learning anything off.

Dawes and Rodan have both generally been viewed as very hard workers.

 

[stewie griffen]

Dawes and Rodan have both generally been viewed as very hard workers.

Dawes can appear very laconic on the field at times, and DRod has the tendency to disappear during games

 

[santa claws]

Would you take Tambling if delisted by the Crows?

no he adds nothing at all.
ask yourself why did we take miller. did we pay too much.
to me we took miller because we had just one 21 yr old established key forward in jack. the rest were babys with issues. we took him because we were bereft of experienced players and kpfs ready to play. we are still terribly short of tall players.

in taking edwards its similar. we have just 1 medium sized forward on the list in ohanlon and he aint ready he may not even make it.. we still lack for experienced players. edwards is both experienced and fills a hole in the list. what did we get edwards for practically nothing at pick 74.these picks should be used on mature players weather they be retreads from another club or state leaguers. we got edwards because we had a lousy forward line this yr that struggled.
you want finals next yr well the price of aiming at finals is taking mature players now. 18 yr old kids are not going to get us there they need time to develop for our longer term and hopefully be ready to replace the older blokes when they are done.

personally i would have loved us to go down the stefan martin and moloney route at brisbane. we desperately need midfield depth and we are crying out for a ruckman forward.
these two combined cost brisbane picks 53 and 7o something.

we just re-signed matt white we could have cut his usless arse out of the club and taken moloney for nothing.he would be easily a massive massive upgrade on matt the hack white.
we could have managed a deal for martin for little cost if we wished to.
most supporters a praising them up we did okay. but we no longer have an option to take a delisted player or a mature psd pick we just signed up the last of the uncontracted players. why did we do that.
4 nd picks and at least 3 are to be used on mids according to cameron. so theres going to be a lot of areas totally ignored this draft.

anyway i dont get the ire at melbourne taking rodan at pick 88 when we can take knights chaplin and edwards all older players. its not about age with these blokes its if they can give you something and they cost little.
our have cost practically nothing they all offer maturity and experience and they all fill in a hole. in this regard we got it right.
the other thing we got right we managed to keep our earlier picks and even upgraded one. so we have a balance of youth with early picks and maturity on the cheap.
melbourne have done similar.

we are not in the wallace yrs where we were taking older players for no good reason at the expense of good picks with a list full of older players already there.
we have 22 odd players aged 22 and under and that will grow by at least 4 this coming draft. taking mature players is helpful to us we need to balance out the list with age maturity and games experience.
melbournr are in the same boat in many ways.

 

[bing181]

Dawes can appear very laconic on the field at times, and DRod has the tendency to disappear during games

It's not about what they do on the field. The few posts above covered it.

 

[Slattery_20]

I love DRod, but lets face it, he can't sustain his efforts for 4 quarters consistently, so I really dont get why Melbourne would pick him up.

Exactly.

I'd have a lot less trouble believing the Melbourne supporters toeing the party line if I could just see a couple of posts saying
"hey, you know who we should get? that short guy that sometimes got a game for Geelong behind Stokes et al... and that short Port guy, who used to be bloody good, but keeps blowing up knees and can't run out a game now. THEY will set a standard, provide real leadership. THAT is what we need".

Right now, I just can't believe people are truly on board with it. It doesn't make sense on face value.

 

[Trav 20]

Exactly.

I'd have a lot less trouble believing the Melbourne supporters toeing the party line if I could just see a couple of posts saying
"hey, you know who we should get? that short guy that sometimes got a game for Geelong behind Stokes et al... and that short Port guy, who used to be bloody good, but keeps blowing up knees and can't run out a game now. THEY will set a standard, provide real leadership. THAT is what we need".

Right now, I just can't believe people are truly on board with it. It doesn't make sense on face value.

I agree, but we gave up nothing so it's really neither here nor there.

I thought it strange, but not worthy of occupying a lot of thought.

 

[Slattery_20]

I agree, but we gave up nothing so it's really neither here nor there.

I thought it strange, but not worthy of occupying a lot of thought.

And fair enough.
I'm not saying it will be a bad call.
Chances are, he'll play a handful of handy games and whoever went for pick 88 will play none.
Just struggling to believe a few of the things being attributed to him.

 

[Jock Coutts_Viney]

HE PROVIDES a good player and a senior body for a cheap pick. Better than Morton.

Rodan>Morton

disappointed he once played for richmond but we will get the failure out of his system. good pick up

 

[Groupie_]

HE PROVIDES a good player and a senior body for a cheap pick. Better than Morton.

Rodan>Morton

disappointed he once played for richmond but we will get the failure out of his system. good pick up

You've been failing a lot more than us lately.