OK, so judging by Pratt's press conference today, it seems that tanking is the win-win situation in that we not only get the priority pick but Pagan goes too.

Lovely result, but can't say I can agree with it but that's a whole new debate for another time.

So say we do get the priority pick, and end up with picks 1 and.....4/5ish. Given how many young players we already have there, and that the new boys would be coming into the team at the expense of Kouta and probably Lappin, is it sustainable to bring in all these new young players with no experience to guide them?

Surely if the priority pick comes our way, at least one of the first round picks will be on traded for a senior player or two? Given the talent out of contract this year, Judd, Riewoldt, Pavlich, Cousins, etc (all of whom exceptionally unrealistic mind you), it'd be negligent not to be looking to use one of those top picks, to secure someone of that ilk.

Obviously not saying anything that hasn't been said before, but, what would you prefer? Pick another kid and run them into the ground by the time that they're 27-28, or take a punt on experience?

Then again, I'm still adamant we should have traded pick 2 for Nathan Brown...

maybe we could get a "trade the picks" petition going ?

_________________
*(grow - fun - gah)

Yeah but whatabout your whataboutism.

Wow, that's an original zinger. Haven't heard that one before. Well at least not from anyone but BlueIce.

i prefer bacon n cheese to original

_________________
*(grow - fun - gah)

Yeah but whatabout your whataboutism.

I believe we should tank for a priority pick this year, which will give us picks 1 and about 4.

These picks plus our 2nd round pick (about pick 20) should all be used on young talent in the draft.

To solve our problem of getting more senior bodies into our team we should do this via trading some of our existing players for players of other teams, and in the pre-season draft. We SHOULD NOT trade our picks away for players of other teams (e.g like we did for O'Reilly, Mansfield, McGuane or Devonport)

Players that we should be drafting in the draft are: Kreuzer and Vezpremi.

Kreuzer because we are in desperate need of a young classy ruckman who will be around for 10 years plus. I know we have Aisake, Hampson and Jacobs, but Aisake and Jacobs are project players, that's why they're rookies. Hampson on the other hand is still learning the trade as he is originally from a soccer background. Kreuzer is this years Leuenberger, which would have been our pick 3 after getting Gibbs at pick 1, last year if the AFL didn't change the priority pick rules.

Vezpremi is the other type of player we so desperately need ( a quick classy midfielder type), as Murphy and Gibbs are all class, but lack a bit of pace.

Pick 20 should then be used on the best available player.

To get more senior bodies into our team through trading/pre-season draft, this should be done by getting players under the age of 24, but with at least 50 games under the belt. We have to be smart with our trading like Hawthorn were with Thompson, Hay and Rawlings.

Is there that much benefit to building up 4 young ruckmen from scratch?

Is there that much to gain out of trading our existing senior players for others in return? Better the devil we know? Would we actually win out in the deal?

What I'm trying to say is that we have Aisake, Jacobs and Hampson as our existing young ruckmen. However there is no guarantee that all 3 will make it at AFL level. Hence that is why Aisake and Jacobs are only ROOKIES and Hampson is still learning as he is from a soccer background. But with KREUZER he is a young classy natural ruckman who will most likely make it and will go top 10 this year. We need a young natural ruckman like Kreuzer, for our future.

I DON'T want to get players in from other clubs. What I'm trying to say is that if we were to get 1 or 2 players from other clubs, we should NOT do it by giving picks away, but instead doing it via pre-season draft or by player exchange only.

Fair enough, valid point. My argument to the contrary is that you wouldn't have the room to develop all 4 without selling one short, especially when the incumbents have done nothing wrong so far, especially given the precedents given in the past to blooding young ruckmen at this club, it's never been fast-tracked. Admittedly in some cases (Batson? That other bloke we had on our rookie list in '05 too who only lasted a year whose name escapes me at this time of the morning), it was justified, but we've never thrown them in the deep end.

Given that we've still got Ackland till the end of 2009, that we may keep McLaren at the end of this year for one more year, that if Cloke's injury is season ending, and will probably have to come back via the VFL, how can you cultivate 4 young ruckmen at a decent level (i.e: not the Bullants two's) or out of position effectively? It's certainly unfair to suggest that Kreuzer would be a walk up start to our first 22, on the basis that he's a top 10 pick (Lions didn't do it with Leunenberger this year with a similiar situation).

I think it's too risky a situation, as it would inevitably lead to cutting one of Jacobs, Hampson or Aisake earlier than need be, either by delisting, or a cheap trade, which would come back to haunt us, ala Jolly with Melbourne, or French with Port.

Ackland, Cloke and McLaren are all 196cm, so they are more KP height rather than genuine ruckmen. They play in the ruck as we don't have any of our young ruckmen ready as yet.

Hampson 201cm, Aisake 201cm, Jacobs 200cm and Kreuzer 200cm are all at genuine ruckmen height.

In a height perspective: Ackland, Cloke and McLaren will struggle against the likes of Fraser 202cm, Sandilands 211cm, Everitt 203cm and Cox 204cm.

Further to that I believe McLaren will be delisted at seasons end.

As with Cloke, he has a history with shoulder injuries and his lack of ruckman height, means that if anything, we can use him as a forward. He may end up retiring earlier than expected due to his shoulder????

Ackland is contracted until end of 2009, but he is now at his third club, lacks ruckman height and has been a disappointment so far. I'd expect that in 2008 and 2009, with the development of our listed young ruckman in 2007 and hopefully with the recruitment of the talented Kreuzer, Ackland may find himself playing mainly with the Bullants as has McLaren in 2006/07.

Ackland and McLaren have been major disappointments, but maybe we are expecting too much from them, given their lack of ruckmen height.

If we recruit Kreuzer, as far as keeping all four: Hampson, Aisake, Kreuzer and Jacobs, Kreuzer will make it, Hampson should make it, Aisake and Jacobs are project players that's why they are only ROOKIES. So we can afford to develop Aisake and Jacobs via the Bullants and have Hampson and Kreuzer play in the seniors in 2008. Hampson and Kreuzer can rotate off the bench, so that they don't get burnt out whilst developing.

Ya know..............

nothing against those two boys.......they're just trying
to make money from something they love.......!

but honestly........all our club had to do was give
ME a call.....and i could have told
them it was a bad idea to recruit them...............!

how come I knew.........?


kindest regards tommi

_________________
that'siti'mnotchangingthistagain......!

I'd use all our early picks on kids.

If we were realistically gunning for a flag within the next couple of years I'd be happy to go after an established player however.

_________________
There is no footy god

I don't think that recruiting senior players necessarily equals that we're gunning for a flag.

I'd rather we inject some senior players of a decent worth into our team for the primary benefit of helping the kids that we already have in our team develop to the stage they should be at. We've already got a list of top 20 picks that rivals anyones.

No point having a team of 22 first round draft picks, if they're all under 21 and simply can't compete physically with the bigger teams.

I agree with you 100% Hoggy.
We currently have Walker, Murphy, Gibbs, Simpson, Russell and Blackwell who are all good young players but they would all benefit from having an enforcer in the midfield.

From all reports, Hampson will be a good ruckman, we have Murphy and Gibbs as number 1 picks, Walker number 2, plus the other players I mentioned as support.

If we don't pursue one of the available midfielders this year, it would border on negligence!

Okay, so Judd is too expensive both money wise and picks-wise as well.
Surely though, we would have to be in a great position to offer Cousins an opportunity to redeem himself?
Forget the moral-high-horse bs.
You have a Brownlow Medallist, Premiership player, Grand Finalist, All - Oz rep, and B&F winner who would have the opportunity to regain his standing in the football community by leading and moulding a young and talented midfield.

If Cousins doesn't wear Navy blue next year, it will be a huge loss for the club IMHO.

I wouldn't knock back Ben Cousins at the club whatsoever. Would compliment Murphy brilliantly. Whatever he does off the field is his own business. He's never let it interfere with what he does on-field, and as far as I'm concerned, is easily the most inspirational player in the league, the amount of times you see him coughing his guts up on the boundary line after he's left everything else out there, is just awe-inspiring.

Having said that, I'd be happy to part with the priority pick and one of our WA boys for Judd.

Anyone one on here that says lets tank the year does not know what Carlton is and stands for. We are a proud club tainted by failure the past 4 years. We need everyone wanting to win, and a ultra competitive spirit to return. Tanking games for the sake of getting a young bloke that may turn into a star is silly. If we are not good enough, then we will compensated by a draft pick. I think we will finish bottom 2 this year judging by our results thus far - winning somewhere between 4-7 games.

_________________
We will win a premiership before Collingwood and Essendon* - and thats all that matters!

best post I've seen from you Joker

I would not touch Cousins with a 10 foot pole. He is seriously bad news, and WC Eagles are not exactly getting good value from him this year are they ... in other words, his off field behaviour certanly does affect the whole playing group.

Blues have had enough problem players with drug issues related to past players, recent and not so recent ... and have you ever considered why Cousins would be throwing up so frequently .... here is a hint, according to FDr Peter Bruckner and others, the drugs he was allegedly taking are performance enhancers which may have that kind of side effect.

Who gives a stuff about tanking.

High draft picks does not necessarily equal success. Got three hrs to go through the examples?

Dick and the rest of the team at Carlton have worked there backsides off to get more sponsors, members, brand awareness etc and we want safe harbour with the shite of the league for another year? We may get their off our own steam anyway but I'm not "hoping" for it. Listen to Eddie the other day - aiming for $100 mill turnover. Think big, guys.

Josh K was our last "priortiy pick". I like him long term, but plenty here will tell you otherwise.

5-8 wins and no more wooden spoons will do me fine.

I believe we should keep adding young talent to our list with our draft picks for the long term success of our team. Hawthorn are a good example of showing that. They got rid of Thompson, Hay and Rawlings all for 1st and 2nd round draft picks. Look where they are compared to us on the ladder. That is because they have alot more young talent on their list than we do. The breakdown of top 40 picks between Carlton and Hawthorn are as follows:

Below I have compared Hawthorn's 2007 list with that of Carlton's 2007 list. I have gone through both teams list and listed the selection range that players at both clubs were drafted at by their original clubs, and the number of players taken in those selection range. For example Matthew Lappin was originally recruited by St.kilda at selection 40. So therefore he is listed at selection 36-40 on the table below for Carlton.

*NOTE: I didn't include father/sons or picks after selection 40.

Carlton:

selection 01-03 = 3
selection 04-06 = 1
selection 07-10 = 1
selection 11-13 = 1
selection 14-16 = 1
selection 17-20 = 3
selection 21-25 = 2
selection 26-30 = 1
selection 31-35 = 1
selection 36-40 = 3

Hawthorn:

selection 01-03 = 4
selection 04-06 = 4
selection 07-10 = 1
selection 11-13 = 1
selection 14-16 = 3
selection 17-20 = 1
selection 21-25 = 3
selection 26-30 = 2
selection 31-35 = 3
selection 36-40 = 2

So by looking at the table above you can see why Hawthorn are 2 years ahead of Carlton in their development, due to their higher number of early draft selections in comparison to Carlton. This is why Carlton need a priority selection at number 1 this year and then another pick at about selection 4.

Looking at the table above you will see that Hawthorn have 8 players taken in the first 6 selections compared to Carlton only 4.
Hawthorn also have 5 players taken between selection 21-30 compared to Carlton only 3.

Hawthorn have a higher number of draft selections compared to Carlton for 2 reasons:

* Carlton losing early draft picks in 2002 and 2003.
* Hawthorn being prepared to trade players for early draft picks E.g Hay & Thompson.

Carlton's 2007 list average age is 22yrs and 110 days, compared to Hawthorn average age 22yrs and 82 days.

Carlton's 2007 list average games played is 52 games compared to Hawthorn only 48 games.

Carlton's average weight per player is 89kg compared to Hawthorn 87kg.

So on average each player at Hawthorn are 1 month younger, 2kg lighter and have played an average of 4 games less than each Carlton player. But in contrast to this they are higher on the ladder.

So Hawthorn are a good example that we need to keep persisting with young talent at the draft, it will eventually pay dividends. We are just 2 years behind due to the 2 years of draft penalties. Hawthorn have more players that were taken in the first 6 selections than us, and that is why I reckon we need to get a priority pick this year so we can add more young talent to our list.

That's a touch narrow-minded I reckon.
If a player of his quality genuinely made the effort & succeeded in overcoming his addiction, gave his dodgy/criminal mates & lifestyle the arse and moved interstate to begin a new chapter of his life then I'd be glad if Carlton snapped him up on a 2 year deal.

_________________
There's so much I could say...