| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| 2000 Draft http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1759 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | The Shag [ Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 2000 Draft |
I just realised how shit the "2000 superdraft" turned out for us. Pick 4: Livingston....tied down by the injury plague, just staring to show signs Pick 10: Wiggins....there are some fans out there, but yet to prove himself. Made worse by the fact that we could have chosen Daniel Kerr, Shaun Burgoyne or even Richard Hadley. Pick 27: Trent Sporn....some would label him a dud. I wouldn't go that far...but also yet to prove himself. Could have chosen Jamie Charman, Adam McPhee or Luke Ablett. Pick 37: Blake Cambell Pick 38: Callan Beasy Pick 39: Sean o'Keafe All de-listed....speaks for itself... Am i the only person who's dissapointed with that? I know i'm dwelling on the past but this draft was fairly important considering what happened in the next few years...our first pick in 2001 was Justin Davies at pick 39 |
|
| Author: | darknavy [ Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think that after about 4 years a club would only have about 3 players from any single draft on their list - so that is about right. |
|
| Author: | BlueWorld [ Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sorry to be picky but 11 Trent Sporn 15 Simon Wiggins 31 Blake Campbell 46 Sean O'Keefe 61 Callan Beasy |
|
| Author: | crazycahn [ Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
pick 6 murray vance? |
|
| Author: | phoenix johnson [ Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
1998, CC. 2000 wasn't the SuperDraft. It was infact considered fairly weak. 2001 was the SuperDraft. |
|
| Author: | Kouta [ Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2000 Draft |
The Shag wrote: Pick 27: Trent Sporn....some would label him a dud. I wouldn't go that far...but also yet to prove himself. Could have chosen Jamie Charman, Adam McPhee or Luke Ablett.
Charman was a zone selection and even they missed out due to the Riewoldt's moving just out of their zone to the Gold Coast. 
Hindsight is an exact science but we are probably the worst drafters with only decent top ten pick on the list - 1AW. |
|
| Author: | thehalford [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 8:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Those picks were the Burgatron's Phantom Draft for that year. You could say at the time of the draft that we were lucky to get Wiggins, Beasy and O'Keeffe, but still, it's a shocker in no uncertain terms at the moment. Ask me again at the end of the year. |
|
| Author: | gerry atric [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 11:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
We all know drafting is difficult, (how could a player as good as Thornton get to rookie draft) but it is difficult for everyone and in order to be a successful club you need to be the best at it. We have been arguably the worst. List our best ten or so players and see how many are genuine 'draft' players (ie not father son or swaps etc.). Kouta local zone Stevo lucky internal draft Lappin established player Scotland established player Thornton rookie draft Whitnall father son Fev genuine draftee Teague swap Houlihan genuine draft Campo genuine draft Waite father son French swap Scotland swap We haven't drafted too many stars over the last ten or so years. I think it goes back to the Elliot dictum of not rebuilding, hopelessly inadequate response to the intro of drafting when we were the most powerful club in the land, based mainly on an incredible country zone and good city zone. Wouldn't have to be Einstein to realise that there was talent around the country for a club with the best recruiting resources.... I think it is important to look back and learn, because our dismal drafting in the past has put us in a position where we have to draft much better than everyone else otherwise we won't go forward. How much better would we be if we'd got Chad Cornes instead of Kris Massie, Lenny Hayes instead of Murray Vance, Simon Black instead of Adam Chatfield. I know everyone you draft can't be a star but some of them need to be otherwise you have a mediocre team. |
|
| Author: | Jarusa [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 11:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
For picks 1-10 our draftees have averaged 19 games for the club, the AFL average is 48. For picks 11-20 our draftees have averaged 103 games for the club, the AFL average is 41. For picks 21-30 our draftees have averaged 3 games for the club, the AFL average is 30. For picks 31-40 our draftees have averaged 22 games for the club, the AFL average is 27. For picks 41-50 our draftees have averaged 26 games for the club, the AFL average is 24. For picks 51-60 our draftees have averaged 16 games for the club, the AFL average is 18. For picks 60+ our draftees have averaged 13 games for the club, the AFL average is 16. Overall below AFL average. http://footygeek.com/content/view/1894/81/ |
|
| Author: | gerry atric [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 11:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
i think, jarusa, it is not just games played but quality. We just haven't drafted enough genuine stars. Up until 2001 we relied on great luck with pre draft players - Ratts, SOS, Kouta to name 3, and swapping picks for players of variable quality from other clubs. My 'favourite' was our swapping a draft pick for Craig Devonport because according to Parko we needed to draft experience (even if every Saints fan told us he was a dog) Devo played half a game for us. The draft pick we gave away was used on Barry Hall. Our hopeless past draft strategy still makes me really angry. Who apart from our match committee thought a broken down hack like O'Reilly was going to get us a flag. We just haven't drafted enough quality. |
|
| Author: | gerry atric [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 11:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: 2000 wasn't the SuperDraft.
It was infact considered fairly weak. You're right PJ, makes you wonder why the geniuses looking after recruiting dceided to trade for high picks in a weak draft and then trade away high picks in 2001 draft |
|
| Author: | Elwood Blues1 [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I didnt start this thread before any of the ShaneO fan club come a knockin on my door.....I agree with Shag that it was a ordinary effort and even though I like Wiggo and Livo as players we probably failed to recruit any real star material. I guess to be equal and fair in this debate it wasnt the strongest draft and apart from Reiwoldt, Kosi and to a lesser extent Didak there were no standouts. Daniel Kerr made it clear he didnt want to leave WA and wouldnt be moving interstate which made it a two horse race for his services. Livo was the popular pick at No 4 and the media pick so in light of the club wanting a key position defender he was an obvious choice and you cant bag the recruiting dept for picking him....however saying that I Thought the Kangaroos did much better with their selections...including D Motlop, Petrie, Harris and Corey Jones. Dylan Smith who was the dud of the group is now a senior player at Freo..... Mark Coughlan at pick 25 from memory was a good get for the Tigers even with his OP problems..... |
|
| Author: | Kouta [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Port did very well getting Shaun Burgoyne, Kane Cornes and Cassisi after our picks of Livo,Sporn and Sean O'Keefe. Players of the quality of McDougal(4), Harris (14), A.McGath(13), Kerr(eighteen), Petrie(23), Hadley(22), McPhee(39), G.Richards(37), Krakouer(41), Coughlan(25), M.Williams(43), Birss(26), C Jones(60) and Johncock (67) were taken in this draft. So it was a quality draft with hidden gems if you had a quality recruiter unlike S. O'Sullivan, you would have done well out of the draft. |
|
| Author: | frank dardew [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Lets square the ledger |
Not sure you can call our drafting in 2000 terrible after all each of wiggins sporn and livingston are all still at carlton and all are considered in the best 25 players at carlton at the moment.- drafting always need to be seen in context Agree that none are stars but apart from riewoldt daniel kerr motlop and Kane cornes none of the other top 20 are stars Perhaps we could have taken Angwin or james davies(both no longer playing) with our first pick or kane pettifer or dylan smith like some other clubs did. Pettifer and jordan mcmahon were both taken before wiggins and sporn would have we been happier with them -are they better than sporn or wiggins Is didak really any better than sporn or wiggins because he was taken at 3 Is mcdougal taken at 5 any more promising than livo. Lets also not forget we were forced into pick no 4 because of duplicitous conduct of hamill. |
|
| Author: | Synbad [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think wiggo is going to be a very handy player. Livo will be a steady back pocket who eventually will be pretty good.. and Sporn i think will get traded and he will flourish. Im not sure if he can handle Denis crash and bash style footy. We also have Prenda and Bannister who are similar types. I dont think there is room for the three of them in the team at the one time. Wed have to trade one to bring in something we dont have. IMO |
|
| Author: | frank dardew [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | hidden gems |
Every club has drafting disasters and everyone has drafting success In particular we have our share of hidden gems Fevola at 38 and apart from Justin longmuir josh carr and lenny hayes the rest of the top 10 wouldnt get close to Brendan Houlihan at 73 perhaps we could have picked Danny Roach at 7 or Cadyn beetham at 9 or even cupido at 6 instead Prenda at 58 -aaron henneman was taken 13 spots earlier -peter street 40 picks earlier or dhurkay at pick 31 Fisher at 72- perhaps we could have picked Tim Walsh at 4 or bo nixon at 21 or moorcroft at 39 |
|
| Author: | Synbad [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
T Bird wasnt a bad rookie selection. Hamill wasnt bad at 70 odd.... Betts was pretty good too eh??? Setanta?? Well he wasnt even on the radar.... |
|
| Author: | phoenix johnson [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Kade at Pick 45. We were the only team brave enough to take a punt on him. Heck, he was AA that year as well. |
|
| Author: | Synbad [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Croady at 60...... |
|
| Author: | phoenix johnson [ Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Synbad wrote: Croady at 60......
Another stooge. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|