Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Mon May 12, 2025 2:56 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 11:29 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:52 pm
Posts: 2044
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)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:34 pm 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:57 pm
Posts: 5338
Location: Melbourne
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).

_________________
James Hird and Essendon* FC - #FOREVERDRUGCHEATS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:49 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:44 am
Posts: 2147
Location: East Melbourne
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:53 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:23 am
Posts: 48682
Location: Canberra
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?

_________________
Click here to follow TalkingCarlton on twitter
TalkingCarlton Posting Rules


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:56 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 6:31 pm
Posts: 24457
Location: Heartbroken
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

_________________
Richard Pratt - A Carlton legend.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 1:04 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:44 am
Posts: 2147
Location: East Melbourne
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 1:43 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:23 am
Posts: 48682
Location: Canberra
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.

_________________
Click here to follow TalkingCarlton on twitter
TalkingCarlton Posting Rules


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 2:00 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:46 am
Posts: 2547
Location: Melbourne
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 2:44 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 2:32 pm
Posts: 33043
Location: Back in reality
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...

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 3:15 pm 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:04 am
Posts: 28377
Location: *Currently banned*
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 3:22 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:12 am
Posts: 10076
Check out Port Adelaide Pearce and Westhoff for 2.

_________________
Oompa loompa doompety dee
If you are wise you'll listen to me


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 3:26 pm 
Offline
Laurie Kerr
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 9:05 pm
Posts: 132
Location: On the high seas
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.

_________________
I love spinach


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:57 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:28 pm
Posts: 4914
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.

_________________
There is no footy god


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:19 pm 
Offline
Garry Crane

Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:31 pm
Posts: 280
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!

_________________
Footytalk Has NEW HOME.
Visit them at www.footytalk.com.au and have a look around.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 133 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group