Speculative Trade Discussion

[Power freak 2008]

Is Richard Tambling that bad. Considering our history for turning players around wouldn't he be worth a shot. Adds a bit of run and carry to our midfield. Not sure if the rumors are true but is is he the worst we could do.

 

[Portia]

Is Richard Tambling that bad. Considering our history for turning players around wouldn't he be worth a shot. Adds a bit of run and carry to our midfield. Not sure if the rumors are true but is is he the worst we could do.

OK, so our midfield has Tambling, Rodan and Pearce in it and we are playing Geelong. How do we win.

 

[Power freak 2008]

^^I would have thought he replaces Kraks role and adds extra rotation. Not sure I would mortage the house but we are not as quick as other sides nowadays. We have Sal, Kornes, Thomas, Broadbent and Logan who are good players but an extra runner wouldn't go astray.

 

[Portia]

So he replaces Krak's role? But Krak's role relies on him him being 190cm and able to run like buggery, and Tambling is a little rover.

And for why do we need to desperately fill Krak's role from outside the club? Do we not have half backs at the club?

 

[Power freak 2008]

Tambling was playing in the back line against us last time we met. We get burned a lot by small forwards and he is at least as tall as Surjan. Pittard is Kraks replacemetn but he is at least another year away. That area we are quite deficient in as a club and no doubt we will be addressing that at draft time.

The real question I have to ask is why Tambling has not realised his potential of being a top 2 draft pick and could we do a David Rodan and make him a better player? He is very quick as well and has a decent build for a footballer. Can't see why he hasn't done better.

Tambling plays half forward, half back and a wing. He had a good year last year and he was the number 4 draft pick.

 

[Asgardian]

Schammer, oh for **** sake NO

Tambling, oh for **** sake NO

Armitage, well worth looking into

Leroy Jetta, well worth looking into

Rhys Palmer, well worth looking into

Djerrkura, worth asking about

Veszpremi, worth asking about

Sherman, worth asking about

Ryan Cook, worth asking about

John McCarthy, worth asking about

 

[Portia]

Tambling was playing in the back line against us last time we met. We get burned a lot by small forwards and he is at least as tall as Surjan.

I think I remember covering this in a Philosophy course.

* Backmen can shut down small forwards
* Tambling was playing in the back line
* Therefore Tambling can shut down small forwards.

Pittard is Kraks replacemetn but he is at least another year away. That area we are quite deficient in as a club and no doubt we will be addressing that at draft time.

???

If you're converting Tambling to play there, we might as well try Banner, Broadbent, Logan, Moore, M. Motlop, Nash, Pettigrew, Pittard or Thomas there.

 

[RangaInTeal]

Tambling would be an upgrade on Marlon, I wouldn't knock it with out actually thinking about it. I think Tambling could be handy to add what we lack; Run, Carry, Pace, Skills.

If the trade was Logan and M.Westhoff for Richard Tambling i probably wouldn't pass it over.

 

[RangaInTeal]

Tambling plays half forward, half back and a wing. He had a good year last year and he was the number 4 draft pick.

And taken before Lance Franklin, similar to Travis Boak being taken before Joel selwood and James Sellar

 

[RangaInTeal]

Schammer, oh for **** sake NO - S#*t skills

Tambling, worth asking about - Probably pay too much

Armitage, oh for **** sake NO - S#*t skills, he is not that good, can't force his way to play a role in a side with Eddy, Dempster and McQualter holding down spots.

Leroy Jetta, worth looking into - Fades in and out of games too much, I prefer Hitchy, would be another Scott Harding move.

Rhys Palmer, oh for **** sake NO - S#*t skills

Djerrkura, worth asking about - Needs an opertunity, not here for me though

Veszpremi, well worth asking about - could become a good skillful onballer

Sherman, oh for **** sake NO - Daniel Motlop and his poor attitude has cost us enough these past two years, please no external Ego's for the next two years.

Ryan Cook, worth asking about - Needs an opertunity, not here for me though

John McCarthy, worth asking about - Needs an opertunity, not here for me though

 

[Natman]

Tambling would be an upgrade on Marlon, I wouldn't knock it with out actually thinking about it. I think Tambling could be handy to add what we lack; Run, Carry, Pace, Skills.

If the trade was Logan and M.Westhoff for Richard Tambling i probably wouldn't pass it over.

We all talk about other posters making ridiculous trade statements and then you come out with one like this.

Sorry, but no club in the AFL would do that trade - let's be a bit more serious.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

I think Tambling will actually thrive in a new environment.

If he is traded for say a 2nd round pick all of a sudden he will be judged as good value for a second round pick rather than derided for being a crap first rounder (selected before Buddy) and I think the one thing he really needs is confidence. A bit like Shulz he seems to have all the skills but just severely lacks confidence. What do Richmond do to these kids?

The next question though would be how many players do we really want with fragile confidence. I mean Shulz seems to have turned it around but the real test will be next time he hits a form slump.

 

[Toots Hibbert]

We all talk about other posters making ridiculous trade statements and then you come out with one like this.

Sorry, but no club in the AFL would do that trade - let's be a bit more serious.

Yeah I wouldn't swap Tom Logan in order to get Richard Tambling either.

 

[Portia]

To be frank, if our trade week was IN: Tambling, OUT: Logan, I don't know that our squad would be any better next year or the year after.

 

[Natman]

Yeah I wouldn't swap Tom Logan in order to get Richard Tambling either.

Agreed - double reverse gotcha.

 

[RangaInTeal]

We all talk about other posters making ridiculous trade statements and then you come out with one like this.

Sorry, but no club in the AFL would do that trade - let's be a bit more serious.

I was trying to be slightly funny, as the next post of "Tambling - Well worth asking about - would pay too much" is more of an honest assesment. Sorry if it was a tad early to be cracking funnies, or if my joke was just poor.

 

[Natman]

I was trying to be slightly funny, as the next post of "Tambling - Well worth asking about - would pay too much" is more of an honest assesment. Sorry if it was a tad early to be cracking funnies, or if my joke was just poor.

No problems with me - but RIT - your reputation precedes you and there might be a few Richmond BFers out there who don't have your sense of humour.

 

[RangaInTeal]

No problems with me - but RIT - your reputation precedes you and there might be a few Richmond BFers out there who don't have your sense of humour.

Well shame on them.

Hey I have been better, trying not to use as many exclimation marks these days

 

[Phhht]

Well shame on them.

Hey I have been better, trying not to use as many exclimation marks these days

Yup you have improved heaps RIT - I can understand about 95% of your posts now and I don't spend that much time trying to decipher words/sentences. Keep up the better work mate!

 

[FishingRick04]

I still think tough decisions need to be made IMO.

Our defence and forward line have completely changed but where does that leave our midfield? The mix has to change IMO.

 

[RangaInTeal]

I still think tough decisions need to be made IMO.

Our defence and forward line have completely changed but where does that leave our midfield? The mix has to change IMO.

Our back six are just about set and played roughly 20-30 games together. Our forward six are still uncertain, how ever I think natural instincts play a far greater role in attack.
Our best 9 onballers, including the ruck(s) have barely played 10 games together.
What ever the setup is, the team needs to become familiar with one and other and contanuity plays a key role in success.

 

[RangaInTeal]

We will win a Premiership when we use 31 players and the following side plays atleast 20 games for the season;

FB: Surjan, Carlile, P.Stewart
HB: Chaplin, Trengove, Hartlett
C: Pearce, Salopek, K.Cornes
HF: Rodan, D.Stewart, Ebert
FF: D.Motlop, Schulz, J.Westhoff
Fol: Lobbe, Boak, Thomas
Int: Gray, Cassisi, Brogan, Salter

But even of that side, we lack a ton of pace.

 

[Macca19]

Nowhere near good enough to be a premiership side.

 

[RangaInTeal]

Nowhere near good enough to be a premiership side.

Just compared it to Collingwoods and St.Kildas, Your right, however, I think We match up well Defensively (ie. back six) but we lack the midfield players they posses and the rebound from defense the also posses, how ever Chappy and Hamish haven't played alot accross half back together and the three games that stand out to me for Hammer, First game vs. Hawthorn, First year vs. Collingwood and Anzac day vs. St. Kilda this year, all played off half back and amazing use of the ball and reading of the game were highlights. Also our forward six is quite poor when matching up against both of the sides.

Jolly, Pendelbry, Swan
Gardiner, Hayes, Montagna
Brogan, Boak, K.Cornes

We are terrible, but our list is young.

 

[TORRES_9]

We will win a Premiership when we use 31 players and the following side plays atleast 20 games for the season;

FB: Surjan, Carlile, P.Stewart
HB: Chaplin, Trengove, Hartlett
C: Pearce, Salopek, K.Cornes
HF: Rodan, D.Stewart, Ebert
FF: D.Motlop, Schulz, J.Westhoff
Fol: Lobbe, Boak, Thomas
Int: Gray, Cassisi, Brogan, Salter

But even of that side, we lack a ton of pace.

Hitchcock, Moore, Pittard and Broadbent should be in that side.