The Paddy Dangerfield Thread

[MadAsHell 4,089]

19 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Martin was always a better player than those 2

Trengove played some good games in 2010-11 but never match winning like Martin. We all got sucked in by a terrible strategy 

 

10 minutes ago, Elegt said:

No. Richmond had Martin at 1 on their list, was in the herald sun today

I dare say thats likely nothing more than a fluff piece. If you can go back through all the phantom drafts and material from recruiters from 2009 and find more than 1 person who had Martin in the top 2 of that draft class I'd be surprised.

Richmond probably say now they had him at 1 as they knew Scully & Trengove weren't going to be there.

[YesitwasaWin4theAges 6,009]

Add another 8-16 minutes back onto the game clock and they are know where near a premiership after tonight.

[Sir Why You Little 34,927]

11 minutes ago, nacnud said:

You’re missing the point. I’m talking about draft time in 2009, not “2010-11”. All clubs rated Scully and Trengove in the top 2-3 in the draft back then. That’s a fact.

Trengove’s career was ruined by injury and Melbourne’s inability to develop players properly (e.g. poor culture, making him captain way too early etc). If we took Martin, he’d either [censored] off to another club after two years or he would be jack watts 2.0, while Trengove goes on to have a potentially much better career at another club. 

Yes I remember all that. And the recruiters were wrong. 
Scully & Trengove were not in the same league as Martin from day 1

Scully was a Runner with a good tank

[Elegt 872]

9 minutes ago, nacnud said:

It doesn’t matter mate. Any club would have drafted/rated those two players in the top 3 along with Martin. You’ve made those judgements (about Scully being soft and Trengove being slow) after observing them playing at AFL level, which is after they were drafted. I’m saying they were the elite standouts (along with Martin) in their draft year. Go look at the draft prospects from 2009 and you’ll see how highly rated Scully and Trengove were. You’re being a hindsight hero.

Richmond had Martin as their best player in that draft, they were right , we were wrong. A big reason why we are still lagging down the bottom while they've shot up to the top

[Foopy on the telly 473]

13 minutes ago, Elegt said:

Richmond had Martin as their best player in that draft, they were right , we were wrong. A big reason why we are still lagging down the bottom while they've shot up to the top

 

17 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes I remember all that. And the recruiters were wrong. 
Scully & Trengove were not in the same league as Martin from day 1

Scully was a Runner with a good tank

You can have the best young talent in the world, but if you don’t provide them with the support they need, the nurturing and proper coaching, culture and development (all of which we failed to do), then they likely won’t turn out to be very good.
 

Paul Roos says in his book that the most important stage of a player’s career is their first five development years. This is what Richmond have succeeded at with players like Martin and it’s what Melbourne have failed to do with blokes like Trengove and Watts. And if Scully had stayed at Melbourne the chances are that he probably would have been delisted by now.

Edited October 24, 2020 by nacnud

[Sir Why You Little 34,927]

Just now, nacnud said:

 

You can have the best young talent in the world, but if you don’t provide them with the support they need, the nurturing and proper coaching, culture and development (all of which we failed to do), then they likely won’t turn out to be very good.
 

Paul Roos says in his book that the most important stage of a player’s career is his first five development years. This is what Richmond have succeeded at with players like Martin and it’s what Melbourne have failed to do with blokes like Trengove and Watts. And if Scully had stayed at Melbourne the chances are that he probably would have been delisted by now.

I am not disputing that at all Nac. We were a very bad Club at that point. 
But Scully as the number 1 recruit i always questioned 

He could run all day, but Martin was always the smarter Footballer

Scully was a joke in 2011, he couldn’t wait to run away. He cashed up. Dustin earnt it

[Queanbeyan Demon 6,116]

36 minutes ago, Elegt said:

No. Richmond had Martin at 1 on their list, was in the herald sun today

In the Hun ah?

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,187]

18 minutes ago, Elegt said:

Richmond had Martin as their best player in that draft, they were right , we were wrong. A big reason why we are still lagging down the bottom while they've shot up to the top

Completely wrong.

Richmond had Scully as the best in the draft and were spewing that we had him.

Its worth noting that no one had Martin over Scully in 2009. No one.

 

[Elegt 872]

15 minutes ago, nacnud said:

 

You can have the best young talent in the world, but if you don’t provide them with the support they need, the nurturing and proper coaching, culture and development (all of which we failed to do), then they likely won’t turn out to be very good.
 

Paul Roos says in his book that the most important stage of a player’s career is their first five development years. This is what Richmond have succeeded at with players like Martin and it’s what Melbourne have failed to do with blokes like Trengove and Watts. And if Scully had stayed at Melbourne the chances are that he probably would have been delisted by now.

Put scully in a top side, he would struggle too, soft as butter

[Elegt 872]

9 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Completely wrong.

Richmond had Scully as the best in the draft and were spewing that we had him.

Its worth noting that no one had Martin over Scully in 2009. No one.

 

From the sun this morning

 

 

 Martin’s final three TAC Cup matches he averaged 153 SuperCoach points and collected 32 disposals each time.

But the Tigers – armed with pick No. 3 – had fallen in love with the future megastar a long time before then and ranked him a clear No.1.

“I remember I saw him play as a bottom-age player and thought, ‘my goodness’,” Jackson said.

“His power and speed was just phenomenal. We were all over him.”

[DubDee 21,266]

47 minutes ago, Elegt said:

Richmond had Martin as their best player in that draft, they were right , we were wrong. A big reason why we are still lagging down the bottom while they've shot up to the top

And they picked Tambling instead of Franklin. You win some you lose some at the draft. 
thankfully we have a much better recruitment team now and haven’t made any glaring errrirs for a while. 

move on FFS

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,187]

15 minutes ago, Elegt said:

From the sun this morning

 

 

 Martin’s final three TAC Cup matches he averaged 153 SuperCoach points and collected 32 disposals each time.

But the Tigers – armed with pick No. 3 – had fallen in love with the future megastar a long time before then and ranked him a clear No.1.

“I remember I saw him play as a bottom-age player and thought, ‘my goodness’,” Jackson said.

“His power and speed was just phenomenal. We were all over him.”

Find a quote from 2009.

Everything you post is hindsight.  There’s some wriggle room with Trengove, but Scully was a lock on par with Walsh and Rowell in his draft year.

Good on Richmond and good on Martin for the way things have turned out, but if they had pick 1, they 100% would have taken Scully.

 

[DubDee 21,266]

Zero doubt the Tigers would have taken Scully. They were even trying to get him to move early days. He was a tigers supporter I think

[Elegt 872]

4 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Find a quote from 2009.

Everything you post is hindsight.  There’s some wriggle room with Trengove, but Scully was a lock on par with Walsh and Rowell in his draft year.

Good on Richmond and good on Martin for the way things have turned out, but if they had pick 1, they 100% would have taken Scully.

 

Not according to that article ....

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,187]

Just now, Elegt said:

Not according to that article ....

That was written this morning.

Hindsight.

 

[Elegt 872]

2 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

That was written this morning.

Hindsight.

 

Its a direct quote from Francis Jackson, their recruiter 

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,187]

3 minutes ago, Elegt said:

Its a direct quote from Francis Jackson, their recruiter 

This morning.

Where’s the source/article from 2009 that says Martin will be the better player?  I’ll help you out; you won’t find it.

Again, congrats to Dusty and Richmond, but they would not have taken him with pick one.

 

[Sir Why You Little 34,927]

10 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Zero doubt the Tigers would have taken Scully. They were even trying to get him to move early days. He was a tigers supporter I think

Yes definitely a big Richmond Supporter and Hailerbury Boy, just like my late uncle, who reminded me regularly back in those dark days 

[Fork 'em 6,572]

1 hour ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Completely wrong.

Richmond had Scully as the best in the draft and were spewing that we had him.

Its worth noting that no one had Martin over Scully in 2009. No one.

 

100%
It was a given in the football world at the time that Scully and Trengove were 1+2.
And no-one blinked when we did.
Of course Richmond are re-writing history now after 3 Norm Smiths they would've taken Martin at 1.

BS.

Edited October 24, 2020 by Fork 'em

[Elegt 872]

27 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

This morning.

Where’s the source/article from 2009 that says Martin will be the better player?  I’ll help you out; you won’t find it.

Again, congrats to Dusty and Richmond, but they would not have taken him with pick one.

 

They're not going to reveal their selection strategy at draft time

[Uncle Fester 2,840]

We were that a mess that if we took Dusty he’d be dead or in jail now. Richmond put in a hell of a lot of work into him; work we were not even close to be able to do. He was a hot mess of talent and took a lot of careful handling. And never forget he shopped himself around and found no takers.

We did the lad a favour by not taking him, and I’m not talking about on field success

[Grr-owl 1,080]

On 10/11/2020 at 3:16 PM, demonstone said:

Let's get Jesus Christ!

Been out of form since the crucifixion.

[drdrake 3,052]

7 hours ago, Fork 'em said:

100%
It was a given in the football world at the time that Scully and Trengove were 1+2.
And no-one blinked when we did.
Of course Richmond are re-writing history now after 3 Norm Smiths they would've taken Martin at 1.

BS.

We drafted players on the game style we wanted to play, good runners, we wanted a uncontested fast game style.

Scully and Trengove you can cop Gysberts and Tapscott they were just bad calls, we did get 1 right in that draft Max Gawn.  It was built as the draft that would win us a flag.  Still remember the photo on the bag page of the herald sun

[Elegt 872]

36 minutes ago, drdrake said:

We drafted players on the game style we wanted to play, good runners, we wanted a uncontested fast game style.

Scully and Trengove you can cop Gysberts and Tapscott they were just bad calls, we did get 1 right in that draft Max Gawn.  It was built as the draft that would win us a flag.  Still remember the photo on the bag page of the herald sun

Gysberts was brent grgic like. Absolute dud

[TRIGON 4,719]

9 hours ago, MadAsHell said:

 

I dare say thats likely nothing more than a fluff piece. If you can go back through all the phantom drafts and material from recruiters from 2009 and find more than 1 person who had Martin in the top 2 of that draft class I'd be surprised.

Richmond probably say now they had him at 1 as they knew Scully & Trengove weren't going to be there.

Yes, revisionist nonsense.

Meanwhile, back on thread, Dangerfield's performance last night was a disgrace. He was a Flower Pot Man...flop-a-lop-alot.