TalkingCarlton
http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

The Best Collection of Late Draft Picks in AFL History?
http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17376		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Michael Jezz [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 11:29 am ]
Post subject:  The Best Collection of Late Draft Picks in AFL History?
This is not a bad recruiting effort by the club:

Fisher- pick 72- (O'sullivan)
Houlihan- 83- (O'sullivan)
Betts- PSD- (Hughes)
Jamison- Rookie (Hughes)
Jackson- Rookie (Hughes)
Setanta- International Rookie (O'sullivan)
Carazzo-Rookie (O'sullivan)
Bentick- Rookie (O'sullivan)
Author:  Dominator_7 [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
Seems we've had more luck with our late draft picks then our early draft picks (apart from the 'no brainers' in Murph, Walks and Gibbs).
Author:  malbi [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
Oh how blinkered we are...

Ferocious felines smash tanking theory

Quote:
indeed some of the game's greatest players in recent times such as Essendon*'s James Hird (pick 79 in 1990) and the Bulldogs' Chris Grant (pick 105 in 1988) were incredibly late draft picks.

At this stage give me a player with the career of James Hird or Chris Grant and he would be more valuable than all of the players that you list put together.
Author:  camel [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
Yes, but when were Hird and Grant drafted? Have a look at the top 10 picks from that era and compare them to the top 10 picks of recent times. You'll most likely find that drafting is just a wee bit more scientific and thorough these days. Moreover, to put it another way, are you suggesting players of Hird and Grant's quality would survive until that late in the draft in 2007 and beyond?
Author:  Deano Supremo [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Best Collection of Late Draft Picks in AFL History?
Michael Jezz wrote:
This is not a bad recruiting effort by the club:

Fisher- pick 72- (O'sullivan)
Houlihan- 83- (O'sullivan)
Betts- PSD- (Hughes)
Jamison- Rookie (Hughes)
Jackson- Rookie (Hughes)
Setanta- International Rookie (O'sullivan)
Carazzo-Rookie (O'sullivan)
Bentick- Rookie (O'sullivan)


Thornton - Rookie
Author:  malbi [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 1:04 pm ]
Post subject: 
camelboy wrote:
Yes, but when were Hird and Grant drafted? Have a look at the top 10 picks from that era and compare them to the top 10 picks of recent times. You'll most likely find that drafting is just a wee bit more scientific and thorough these days. Moreover, to put it another way, are you suggesting players of Hird and Grant's quality would survive until that late in the draft in 2007 and beyond?

... as scientific as Tambling before Franklin? I remember the talk at the time. Tambling could have gone at #1... even Synbad was talking his praises.

Hird and Grant wouldn't last that late in the draft nowadays. There is a much better system for identifying talent. To simply describe our late drafting as the best in AFL history is a bit rich for me.

Jamison 1 AFL game. Jackson 4 AFL games. They are hardly "best ever" statistics.
Author:  camel [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 1:43 pm ]
Post subject: 
Yeah I agree with that, and I never claimed there would be no duds in the top 10, but the Hird and Grant theories aren't really suitable for comparison I don't reckon. I'd suggest a Brad Fisher type is probably as good a snag as one will get with a post #70 pick in the current era.

Hird, especially, and Grant to a lesser degree are once in a generation players for their respective clubs. Brad Fisher, as useful as he is, will never be that.
Author:  Andain [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 2:00 pm ]
Post subject: 
Not only were the early drafts a miss and miss affair and fairly unprofessional Grant was drafted when he was 15 before many had even though of him as a potential draft pick down the road.
Author:  jimmae [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 2:44 pm ]
Post subject: 
malleefowl wrote:
Oh how blinkered we are...

Ferocious felines smash tanking theory

Quote:
indeed some of the game's greatest players in recent times such as Essendon*'s James Hird (pick 79 in 1990) and the Bulldogs' Chris Grant (pick 105 in 1988) were incredibly late draft picks.

At this stage give me a player with the career of James Hird or Chris Grant and he would be more valuable than all of the players that you list put together.

The Lions are still running on the senior core that got them the cup minus Voss... what moronic journalism.

And someone please explain to me how bottom 4 isn't bottoming out...
Author:  verbs [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 3:15 pm ]
Post subject: 
It could well be the best collection in AFL history. Referencing Grant and Hird as individuals is meaningless when questioning whether our collection as a whole is the best ever put together.

I wonder how it stacks up against other collections? Probably pick 70+ or rookie should qualify for inclusion in the collection. I suppose we'd be doing okay.
Author:  Electric Blue [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 3:22 pm ]
Post subject: 
Check out Port Adelaide Pearce and Westhoff for 2.
Author:  popeye [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 3:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Best Collection of Late Draft Picks in AFL History?
Michael Jezz wrote:
This is not a bad recruiting effort by the club:

Fisher- pick 72- (O'sullivan)
Houlihan- 83- (O'sullivan)
Betts- PSD- (Hughes)
Jamison- Rookie (Hughes)
Jackson- Rookie (Hughes)
Setanta- International Rookie (O'sullivan)
Carazzo-Rookie (O'sullivan)
Bentick- Rookie (O'sullivan)


Um, I guess so, but they haven't achieved anything together yet, apart from a couple of spoons and a low finish this year. Let's judge in a couple of years, they certainly show promise as a group and am rapt with Fish's progress in particular this year. Would Simmo be classified as late at 45?

Gee, I wish we had've had the chance to recruit Tambling.
Author:  Humpers [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:57 pm ]
Post subject: 
camelboy wrote:
Yes, but when were Hird and Grant drafted? Have a look at the top 10 picks from that era and compare them to the top 10 picks of recent times. You'll most likely find that drafting is just a wee bit more scientific and thorough these days. Moreover, to put it another way, are you suggesting players of Hird and Grant's quality would survive until that late in the draft in 2007 and beyond?


It is also worth noting that prior to 1996 players were drafted as U/17yo players whilst these days they are drafted a year later from the U/18 competitions. This extra year makes a big difference in the "accuracy" of the assesment.
Author:  chyna [ Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
malleefowl wrote:
camelboy wrote:
Yes, but when were Hird and Grant drafted? Have a look at the top 10 picks from that era and compare them to the top 10 picks of recent times. You'll most likely find that drafting is just a wee bit more scientific and thorough these days. Moreover, to put it another way, are you suggesting players of Hird and Grant's quality would survive until that late in the draft in 2007 and beyond?

... as scientific as Tambling before Franklin? I remember the talk at the time. Tambling could have gone at #1... even Synbad was talking his praises.
.


HAHAHAHA!!! This is pure gold.. PURE GOLD!!

How sad to realise that the demigod of TalkingCarlton is actually fallible. (I was going to write "a buffoon" but that would have been termed "pesonal abuse".)
Feel free to moderate that comment out if you really feel the need "mods".

PURE GOLD I TELL YA!
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/