I tend to agree. At pick 60+ in a weak draft getting a guy who many pundits including guys like Matt Burgan rated considerably higher would ahve been worth a gamble. No disrespect to O'Keefe and I hope he proves to be a gun player, but he is the type of guy that would have lasted until the Rookie draft. No doubt there were some off field queries about this guy, because its rare that a tall gets overlooked by all 16 clubs when he is highly regarded, especially in a shallow draft, but a guy who performed as well as he did in the champs deserves a chance and I just hope that we haven't made a HUGE blunder on this one. I guess time will tell.
i don't understand, what did richmond gain by picking him in the ps draft rather than the National draft?
There was no chance that we were ever going to draft Gourdis. Clayton didn't rate him at all.
A mate of mine in the west kept mentioning that he is a good footballer on a good day but disinterested when the ball isn't delivered too him on a platter. He reckons he did well in the carnival because the WA team was so dominate not because he is a great player.
Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"
Time will tell whether Richmond have unearthed a diamond or whether the Rookie risk was a small price to pay for a failure.
Looks like we dodged a bullet then huh!
Word floating around the Richmond boards is that Gourdis suffered/suffers from depression.
I guess that could be considered worse then recruiting a player with a bad attitude. If true, good luck to the guy with recovery.