Mega Thread Trade/Free Agency Open Discussion - RFC Forum

[DrMike]

Richmond did have five more wins and four less losses this year, but of those five extra wins, two of them were by under two goals. Only one of Richmond's losses were by under two goals.

On the other hand, Collingwood played in six matches that were decided by less than two goals, but lost all of them. Three of those losses were by under 6 points.

It doesn't take too much to turn such narrow losses into wins, so simply looking at wins and losses isn't a full guide to a teams performance. Rarely does a team lose all six close matches they played in as Collingwood did this year.

I don't think improvement will magically happen though, but winning the close matches, and further improvement from the larger number of quality under-24 year olds on Collingwood's list is quite possible and realistic.

There are only seven players on the Collingwood list who are between the ages of 24-26 years of age. When more of the current youngsters reach that age group, then Collingwood's performances and consistency will significantly improve.

On the other hand, Richmond already have twelve players on their list in the 24-26 years of age range, so their potential improvement is not as great as Collingwood, and Richmond don't have the same quality of under-24 year olds coming through as Collingwood has.Collingwood's list quality and age is significantly better than Richmond. Firstly, there are 20 players on Collingwood's list who have yet to turn 24, and that is the age where improvement comes from. Richmond only have 15 players under the age of 24, which is a considerable difference.

Secondly, Collingwood had six representatives in the AFL Under-24 team of 2015 squad, which was the most of any club. Western Bulldogs had five, and GWS had four. Richmond only had two representatives, which was ahead of only Fremantle, Geelong, Hawthorn and North Melbourne.

Of those six Collingwood representatives that made the Under-24 team, none of the four current top-10 draft picks at the club made the squad, but realistically could over the next 1-3 years. They are Matthew Scharenberg, James Aish, Jordan DeGoey and Darcy Moore.How did you come to that conclusion? Both Collingwood and Richmond have 35 players on their list currently for 2016, so both clubs will add the same amount of "kids" to the list before next season.

The average age of the 35 players on the current Collingwood list for 2016 is 24 years and 4 months. The average age of the 35 players on the current Richmond list for 2016 is 25 years and 7 months, which is quite significant in footy.That's quite wrong. Try counting that again. Collingwood has only four players who are 28 years of age or older on the current 35 player list for 2016. Dane Swan (31), Travis Cloke (28), Tyson Goldsack (28) and Alan Toovey (28).

In Round 22 this year, Collingwood had a great 48 points win over Geelong, and the average age of the team that played that night was only 23 years and 166 days, which is exceptionally young. On the other hand, the Richmond team that put up a terrible performance against North Melbourne in the Elimination Final was a lot older at 25 years and 205 days.

 

[theflea]

Richmond did have five more wins and four less losses this year, but of those five extra wins, two of them were by under two goals. Only one of Richmond's losses were by under two goals.

On the other hand, Collingwood played in six matches that were decided by less than two goals, but lost all of them. Three of those losses were by under 6 points.

It doesn't take too much to turn such narrow losses into wins, so simply looking at wins and losses isn't a full guide to a teams performance. Rarely does a team lose all six close matches they played in as Collingwood did this year.

I don't think improvement will magically happen though, but winning the close matches, and further improvement from the larger number of quality under-24 year olds on Collingwood's list is quite possible and realistic.

There are only seven players on the Collingwood list who are between the ages of 24-26 years of age. When more of the current youngsters reach that age group, then Collingwood's performances and consistency will significantly improve.

On the other hand, Richmond already have twelve players on their list in the 24-26 years of age range, so their potential improvement is not as great as Collingwood, and Richmond don't have the same quality of under-24 year olds coming through as Collingwood has.Collingwood's list quality and age is significantly better than Richmond. Firstly, there are 20 players on Collingwood's list who have yet to turn 24, and that is the age where improvement comes from. Richmond only have 15 players under the age of 24, which is a considerable difference.

Secondly, Collingwood had six representatives in the AFL Under-24 team of 2015 squad, which was the most of any club. Western Bulldogs had five, and GWS had four. Richmond only had two representatives, which was ahead of only Fremantle, Geelong, Hawthorn and North Melbourne.

Of those six Collingwood representatives that made the Under-24 team, none of the four current top-10 draft picks at the club made the squad, but realistically could over the next 1-3 years. They are Matthew Scharenberg, James Aish, Jordan DeGoey and Darcy Moore.How did you come to that conclusion? Both Collingwood and Richmond have 35 players on their list currently for 2016, so both clubs will add the same amount of "kids" to the list before next season.

The average age of the 35 players on the current Collingwood list for 2016 is 24 years and 4 months. The average age of the 35 players on the current Richmond list for 2016 is 25 years and 7 months, which is quite significant in footy.That's quite wrong. Try counting that again. Collingwood has only four players who are 28 years of age or older on the current 35 player list for 2016. Dane Swan (31), Travis Cloke (28), Tyson Goldsack (28) and Alan Toovey (28).

In Round 22 this year, Collingwood had a great 48 points win over Geelong, and the average age of the team that played that night was only 23 years and 166 days, which is exceptionally young. On the other hand, the Richmond team that put up a terrible performance against North Melbourne in the Elimination Final was a lot older at 25 years and 205 days.

So your improvement is realistic yet ours isn't? Spare me you prognostications. Its pure supposition, as like you said improvement isn't guaranteed.

 

[Komrade_Tiger]

The stats have spoken
*mic drop*

RATING THE LISTS

The stats gurus at Champion Data will release a complete list assessment for every team when their 2016 Prospectus is released, but they have revealed some insight that Treloar might wish he had seen before his Falls Creek press conference.

Collingwood has two players rate for their position — Scott Pendlebury and Dane Swan.

The Tigers have five — Alex Rance, Dustin Martin, Brett Deledio, Jack Riewoldt and Bachar Houli.

There were seven “above average” Magpies at the start of last season — Dane Swan, Travis Varcoe, Steele Sidebottom, Jarryd Blair, Jamie Elliott, Paul Seedsman and Marley Williams. Based on 2015 form Swan returns to the elite bracket for 2016 while Varcoe, Sidebottom, Williams and Elliott should hold their spots. Paul Seedsman was traded to Adelaide and Jarryd Blair is touch and go.

Taylor Adams is a certainty to jump into the “above average” category along with former Lion Jack Crisp.

Treloar will also be there and ex-Demon Jeremy Howe might too (he was rated above average 12 months ago), but the jury is out on James Aish, who was rated below average last year but with the potential of a No.7 draft pick.

And the Pies have No.5 pick Jordan de Goey, pick 6 Matt Scharenberg and father-son gun Darcy Moore, who should all be pushing towards elite in the next 2-3 years, plus a 10-year ruckman in Brodie Grundy.

The downside is the loss of No.10 pick Nathan Freeman to St Kilda and No.19 pick Ben Kennedy to Melbourne — and the age of Swan (32 next February) and Travis Cloke (29 in March), who could both be gone when the likes of Treloar, Adams and De Goey reach their prime. Cloke’s powers have faded but replacing him will be top of the list management agenda — the Pies’ leading goalkickers this year were Jamie Elliott (35), Cloke (34) and Alex Fasolo (17) which isn’t a recipe for premiership success.

At Richmond, meanwhile, Martin and Houli jumped into the elite category while Shane Edwards has slipped back to above average.

Nick Vlastuin and Troy Chaplin did enough to stay in the above average category along with Ivan Maric and Trent Cotchin, although the captain’s elimination final performance will haunt him for a while.

Chris Yarran was rated elite at the start of the year but is set for a tumble, although the Tigers will be hoping he plays more like the 2014 Yarran than the 2015 version at Punt Rd.

There aren’t many players dropping from the top bracket, but there aren’t a lot pushing up from below either, with Brandon Ellis (rated average last year) the clear standout. The Tigers need the likes of Reece Conca (average), Ty Vickery (average) plus first-round draft picks Ben Lennon and Corey Ellis to make the jump.

BUCKY’S TAKE

Former Hawthorn recruiter Gary Buckenara put every club’s list under the microscope after the 2015 season. Here’s a quick version of what he said about the Magpies and Tigers.

COLLINGWOOD


Nathan Buckley has a number of quality young players on his list and the sky is the limit for the group next season — finals are a non-negotiable and even challenging for a premiership isn’t out of the question.

It was inexperience that cost them this season, while bad luck with injuries also played a role but as a club internally, they’d still be disappointed.

For mine, the Pies have been disappointing the last couple of years even though they have been in a bit of a development/rejig mode. It’s time for them to start delivering.

I see them being a contender next year — as I said earlier as a minimum should play finals in 2016 — but if not next year in terms of challenging then definitely in 2-3 years the Pies should be knocking on the door of winning a premiership.

RICHMOND

The time is now, Richmond. Your premiership window is open.

The fact is this list as it stands, with the addition of Chris Yarran during the trade period, can beat anyone on its day. They are a very dangerous side with a good spread of talent across all lines. It’s consistency and lack of confidence that holds the group back.

What I have learnt by analysing Richmond’s list at the conclusion of 2015 and heading into next year is that the Tigers are definitely in the window and must win a premiership in the next two to three years or they risk missing out and sliding back down the ladder … again.

September action is a non-negotiable for the next three years.

THE VERDICT

Treloar is wrong if he’s talking about right now — the Tigers’ list is well stocked with high-grade talent and ready to challenge for a flag. That’s hardly surprising looking at what happened this year when Richmond won 15 games to Collingwood’s 10, including a 91-point thumping of the Pies in Round 21. Richmond’s main problem is turning that into results in September.

But if Treloar is looking a couple of years into the future, he might have a point.

While Richmond’s core of Cotchin (25), Riewoldt (27) and Martin (24) are all in their prime, there are some concerns at the top end in the form of 29-year-olds Troy Chaplin and Ivan Maric, while Brett Deledio is 28.

The bigger worry is making an impact while the window is open — something the Tigers have conspicuously failed to do in the past three seasons — before being overtaken by the juggernauts of GWS and Gold Coast. And possibly Collingwood.

Sidebottom, Adams, Moore, de Goey, Crisp and Grundy — plus Treloar and Aish — form a group ready to bust open the flag window. And while Swan and Cloke might be in the twilight of their careers, superstar Pendlebury is still only 27 and has just signed a four-year contract.

Interestingly given the state of each club’s list, Collingwood traded away pick 7 in this year’s draft and their first-round pick next year in the Treloar deal — so they are banking on the current squad delivering. While Richmond has pick 12, the Pies don’t get a look in until pick 27 this year and the story will be similar next year.

The first test for Treloar’s theory will be in Round 2 next year when Collingwood and Richmond face off on a Friday night at the MCG.

That game suddenly has a lot more spice, and is it a coincidence it’s on April 1?

 

[Tiger71]

Richmond did have five more wins and four less losses this year, but of those five extra wins, two of them were by under two goals. Only one of Richmond's losses were by under two goals.

On the other hand, Collingwood played in six matches that were decided by less than two goals, but lost all of them. Three of those losses were by under 6 points.

It doesn't take too much to turn such narrow losses into wins, so simply looking at wins and losses isn't a full guide to a teams performance. Rarely does a team lose all six close matches they played in as Collingwood did this year.

I don't think improvement will magically happen though, but winning the close matches, and further improvement from the larger number of quality under-24 year olds on Collingwood's list is quite possible and realistic.

There are only seven players on the Collingwood list who are between the ages of 24-26 years of age. When more of the current youngsters reach that age group, then Collingwood's performances and consistency will significantly improve.

On the other hand, Richmond already have twelve players on their list in the 24-26 years of age range, so their potential improvement is not as great as Collingwood, and Richmond don't have the same quality of under-24 year olds coming through as Collingwood has.Collingwood's list quality and age is significantly better than Richmond. Firstly, there are 20 players on Collingwood's list who have yet to turn 24, and that is the age where improvement comes from. Richmond only have 15 players under the age of 24, which is a considerable difference.

Secondly, Collingwood had six representatives in the AFL Under-24 team of 2015 squad, which was the most of any club. Western Bulldogs had five, and GWS had four. Richmond only had two representatives, which was ahead of only Fremantle, Geelong, Hawthorn and North Melbourne.

Of those six Collingwood representatives that made the Under-24 team, none of the four current top-10 draft picks at the club made the squad, but realistically could over the next 1-3 years. They are Matthew Scharenberg, James Aish, Jordan DeGoey and Darcy Moore.How did you come to that conclusion? Both Collingwood and Richmond have 35 players on their list currently for 2016, so both clubs will add the same amount of "kids" to the list before next season.

The average age of the 35 players on the current Collingwood list for 2016 is 24 years and 4 months. The average age of the 35 players on the current Richmond list for 2016 is 25 years and 7 months, which is quite significant in footy.That's quite wrong. Try counting that again. Collingwood has only four players who are 28 years of age or older on the current 35 player list for 2016. Dane Swan (31), Travis Cloke (28), Tyson Goldsack (28) and Alan Toovey (28).

In Round 22 this year, Collingwood had a great 48 points win over Geelong, and the average age of the team that played that night was only 23 years and 166 days, which is exceptionally young. On the other hand, the Richmond team that put up a terrible performance against North Melbourne in the Elimination Final was a lot older at 25 years and 205 days.

its settled guys, this Muppet believes you dont get improvement once you hit 24 years of age

 

[Tiger71]

I didn't read any of this wall of text/bullshit after you claimed our average age is 25 years and 7 months.
We are not North Melbourne

Perhaps you should read this site before correcting me on my numbers
The ages are for next season
https://www.draftguru.com.au/lists/2016

that is why he is not including rookies, its what the pies supporters do...they just spin shit and eat it, then unfortunately try to sell it on other clubs boards.

 

[UpTheGuts]

I agree with the contention that if Collingwood had played better they might have won more games.

On that basis, I'm rapt with our 2015 flag.

 

[_RT_]

But KissStephanie and Trelol said Collolingwood are better.

 

[DrMike]

But KissStephanie and Trelol said Collolingwood are better.

Pies supporters are the ones that need convincing

Just in time for Buckley to get a contract extension

 

[CltAltDelicious]

This always amuses me how people tailor metrics to suit their agenda. I mean why wouldn't you use 60 years in this case, is it because it than adds another 2 premierships to even the ledger. Why not use 10 years or 25 years? In fact, why not use 35 years to gauge recent success.

Why are there Colin'wood supporters on our forum?

 

[Tiger71]

AFL Club Lists for 2016
Club Senior List Rookies Average Age Age Rank Average Games Games Rank
Adelaide 37 players 3 (+1 cat B) 24.2 years 13th 60 games 16th
Brisbane 35 players 3 (+2 cat B) 23.2 years 18th 49 games 18th
Carlton 33 players 3 (+2 cat B) 24.8 years 6th 62 games 12th
Collingwood 35 players 2 (+2 cat B) 24.3 years 10th 69 games 9th
Essendon 32 players 1 (+1 cat B) 25.4 years 3rd 86 games 3rd
Fremantle 35 players 1 (+1 cat B) 25.8 years 2nd 91 games 2nd
Geelong 34 players 3 (+1 cat B) 24.8 years 7th 77 games 6th
Gold Coast 35 players 0 (+0 cat B) 24.1 years 15th 65 games 11th
Greater Western Sydney 38 players 0 (+0 cat B) 23.8 years 17th 62 games 12th
Hawthorn 36 players 2 (+2 cat B) 25.0 years 5th 84 games 4th
Melbourne 35 players 3 (+0 cat B) 24.1 years 16th 59 games 17th
North Melbourne 34 players 3 (+0 cat B) 25.9 years 1st 101 games 1st
Port Adelaide 36 players 2 (+0 cat B) 24.6 years 8th 76 games 7th
Richmond 36 players 2 (+1 cat B) 24.3 years 11th 71 games 8th
St Kilda 37 players 1 (+1 cat B) 24.2 years 12th 61 games 15th
Sydney 35 players 3 (+1 cat B) 24.5 years 9th 66 games 10th
West Coast 35 players 1 (+2 cat B) 25.1 years 4th 81 games 5th
Western Bulldogs 36 players 1 (+0 cat B) 24.1 years 14th 62 games 12th

 

[Tiger Toffee]

So Buckenara thinks if we don't win a flag in the next 2-3 years were going to tumble, yeah nah, sorry bucks but pretty much most of our guns will still have 3-6 years left at min, funny thing is he puts Pendelbury in the " still has years left " catagory at 27 but puts Lids in the old codger bracket at 28, lids could play till he's 36 easy.

 

[Infamy]

that is why he is not including rookies, its what the pies supporters do...they just spin shit and eat it, then unfortunately try to sell it on other clubs boards.

Of course we leave them out
Our rookies are all 18-19 years of age
Collingwood's are 21-25 years old
Wouldn't want them throwing out the stats, I mean they're only pretend players

 

[Matchu]

How far down the track are Vickery and RFC when it comes to contract negotiations?

 

[DrMike]

How far down the track are Vickery and RFC when it comes to contract negotiations?

Between 0 months and 11 months

Stupid question really

 

[Matchu]

Between 0 months and 11 months

Stupid question really

I suppose what I was actually asking is if any Richmond fans have heard Vickery is close to re-signing...

 

[DrMike]

Why are there Colin'wood supporters on our forum?

Anxiety about their club being on the right path

 

[Komrade_Tiger]

I suppose what I was actually asking is if any Richmond fans have heard Vickery is close to re-signing...

He's not back at training yet so no news on him, still on holidays

 

[Matchu]

He's not back at training yet so no news on him, still on holidays

Cheers mate.

 

[Blinger]

This always amuses me how people tailor metrics to suit their agenda. I mean why wouldn't you use 60 years in this case, is it because it than adds another 2 premierships to even the ledger. Why not use 10 years or 25 years? In fact, why not use 35 years to gauge recent success.

Well it was one of your nuff nuff supporteres that came on here and mentioned our success in the past 35 years

 

[DrMike]

I suppose what I was actually asking is if any Richmond fans have heard Vickery is close to re-signing...

The contract that finishes the end of next year? Still a stupid question. It's pre-season mate, give it a rest.

 

[Matchu]

The contract that finishes the end of next year? Still a stupid question. It's pre-season mate, give it a rest.

Don't tell Todd Goldstein that. He just signed a new contract, despite being contracted until the end of next year.

 

[Blinger]

Just in case it's escaped all of you I'll let you in on a secret.. footballers generally speaking are not your rocket surgeons

He wouldn't have thought twice about mentioning another club or the implications everyone here jumps on, he's just some kid answering leading questions from a journo hoping to generate exactly this kind of mild controversy from the readers

What the hell is a rocket surgeon?

 

[Infamy]

What the hell is a rocket surgeon?

Its usually a joke, mixing rocket scientist with brain surgeon

 

[DrMike]

Don't tell Todd Goldstein that. He just signed a new contract, despite being contracted until the end of next year.

Good on him, doesn't stop your question from being stupid this time of year. Use some common sense before posting.

 

[Matchu]

Good on him, doesn't stop your question from being stupid this time of year. Use some common sense before posting.

Alright mate. Think what you like.