| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Players on our list would you have ahead of a top two pick: http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19769 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Barack Obama [ Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Players on our list would you have ahead of a top two pick: |
I had this debate in 2002 with a friend, who said that when we lost the picks in 2002 it would really hurt us as there was not one player on our list worth more than those two picks. I disagreed with him and stupidly named about five or six. He wasn't completely right though, as in hindsight you would have taken Fev ahead of Wells/Goddard. But lets look at it now I would have the following players: Judd Gibbs Murphy Kreuzer Fevola. Five is a pretty good effort. And in years to come I think this fab five will be regarded as the best in the league. Whether or not these players play in a Carlton premiership will be determined by the next ten on the list in my opinion. |
|
| Author: | Stefchook [ Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Interesting thread. We're going to probably need to develop at least one gun defender to be in the running for a flag. It's probably a little late in his career now, but Stevens would be another who might be a chance to make such a list. And Simmo. Or perhaps Aisake and Hampson with their athleticism might step up and become something really special. Or perhaps Walker if he somehow overcomes his disposal and decision making issues. |
|
| Author: | CarltonClem [ Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
A no. 2 pick in which draft? The whole thing about a no. 2 pick is that it's relative to the talent in the draft AT THE TIME THEY WERE DRAFTED. Hindsight in this kind of analysis is useless. If it was the 2000 draft, you're talking Justin Koschitszke at no. 2, if you're talking 2001 draft, you're talking Luke Ball at no. 2, 2003 - Andrew Walker, 2004 - Jarryd Roughead, 2005 - Dale Thomas, 2006 - Scott Gumbleton. |
|
| Author: | Jarusa [ Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
This is BO's backhanded attempt at criticising Wayne Hughes by suggesting he has not recruited any 'top 2' picks out of the top 2 picks. |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just quietly I dont think we are too far behind in selecting Fisher and Simpson in comparison to Goddard and Wells. What hurts is not having Goddard, Wells, Simpson and Fisher - that would have been the mother of all drafts. |
|
| Author: | Barack Obama [ Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jarusa wrote: This is BO's backhanded attempt at criticising Wayne Hughes by suggesting he has not recruited any 'top 2' picks out of the top 2 picks.
No it's not. Because I said we would have Gibbs and Murphy ahead of them. As in I wouldn't trade Gibbs or Murphy for a top 2 pick. |
|
| Author: | Barack Obama [ Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
AGRO wrote: Just quietly I dont think we are too far behind in selecting Fisher and Simpson in comparison to Goddard and Wells.
What hurts is not having Goddard, Wells, Simpson and Fisher - that would have been the mother of all drafts. And brock in 2003, and Hansen/Gumbleton/Luenberger last year 
|
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Barack Obama wrote: AGRO wrote: Just quietly I dont think we are too far behind in selecting Fisher and Simpson in comparison to Goddard and Wells. What hurts is not having Goddard, Wells, Simpson and Fisher - that would have been the mother of all drafts. And brock in 2003, and Hansen/Gumbleton/Luenberger last year I am more than comfortable with Walker in 2003 - and yes one of Hansen, Gumbleton or Luenberger would have been nice - but you cant blame WH for that. 
|
|
| Author: | Andain [ Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
AGRO wrote: Barack Obama wrote: AGRO wrote: Just quietly I dont think we are too far behind in selecting Fisher and Simpson in comparison to Goddard and Wells. What hurts is not having Goddard, Wells, Simpson and Fisher - that would have been the mother of all drafts. And brock in 2003, and Hansen/Gumbleton/Luenberger last year I am more than comfortable with Walker in 2003 - and yes one of Hansen, Gumbleton or Luenberger would have been nice - but you cant blame WH for that. If not for the penalties we could've potnetially have had both Walker and McLean from that draft. |
|
| Author: | Freddy47 [ Sat Jan 26, 2008 3:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Andain wrote: If not for the penalties we could've potnetially have had both Walker and McLean from that draft.
I think they were more keen on Tenace or Sylvia rather than McLean. |
|
| Author: | Andain [ Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Freddy47 wrote: Andain wrote: If not for the penalties we could've potnetially have had both Walker and McLean from that draft. I think they were more keen on Tenace or Sylvia rather than McLean. As I said, potentially had McLean. Also we couldn't have had Sylvia regardless because Melbourne would've still picked him up with their priortity pick #3. |
|
| Author: | Barack Obama [ Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Andain wrote: AGRO wrote: Barack Obama wrote: AGRO wrote: Just quietly I dont think we are too far behind in selecting Fisher and Simpson in comparison to Goddard and Wells. What hurts is not having Goddard, Wells, Simpson and Fisher - that would have been the mother of all drafts. And brock in 2003, and Hansen/Gumbleton/Luenberger last year I am more than comfortable with Walker in 2003 - and yes one of Hansen, Gumbleton or Luenberger would have been nice - but you cant blame WH for that. If not for the penalties we could've potnetially have had both Walker and McLean from that draft. That's the point I was making. I am actually very happy with Walker and TBH would rather him than Brock. He will explode this year Ireckon. Though from what I have heard we would have taken Kepler Bradley with pick 5 if we had that pick, so it's no loss if that was the case. However losing Hansen/Gumbleton/Selwoodd/luenberger really hurts. @#$%&! you Demetriou |
|
| Author: | SparkyBlue [ Sun Jan 27, 2008 7:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Draft penalties + No Goddards/Wells + inept coach = JUDD! (and K-Dogg) 
Interesting point you make at the end as well BO - the skills of the ten players following and the depth we have will determine just how good we are going to be... 5 players doesn't make a football team, although with those players it's a great start.
|
|
| Author: | 4thchicken [ Sun Jan 27, 2008 8:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It all comes down to list strength and where the list is from a development standpoint. If its aging or needing to be turned over pretty much any player above 23-25 could be seen as expendable for a top 2 pick given that they have plateaued in terms of physical development and you know what you are getting. A top 2 pick however brings hope/the unknown. I dont think you can judge top 2 picks by who was actually selected in previous drafts, but rather you would look at who was still available at the time of the selection. Obviously with the benefit of hindsight you could pretty much pick the absolute best player from each draft (#1 aside) however that is what having a high pick is all about - giving hope to the club/supporters- and that is why you would look to have the high pick over a plateaued player. |
|
| Author: | Lace Out [ Sun Jan 27, 2008 9:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I agree that it is too hard to say who would be a top two pick, apart from Judd, Kruezer, Murphy, Walker, and Gibbs for obvious reasons... To add a few more to that list you probably need to look at it as "who would you say would be worth a first round pick without doubt". Judd Gibbs Murphy Walker Kruezer Stevens Fev Simpson Waite Scotland These players are my top ten choices from our list who I would perceive to be First Rd material.. |
|
| Author: | Elwood Blues1 [ Sun Jan 27, 2008 9:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Said it before that I am a fan of Goddard and in the right environment he could be a great player....skilled, strong and attacks the footy well. Given he was fit and free of his family's off field antics he would be the equal of some of those players on BO's list. Wells would be a nice finisher in a classier outfit, the Roos blue collar style doesnt suit.....put him in a Port Adelaide jumper with the Burgoynes, Pearce etc and he would be better value.... The jury is out on Gibbs, Murphy and Kruezer..I expect the three of them to be good players but how much they can impact and win games is yet to be determined..... |
|
| Author: | ryan2000 [ Mon Jan 28, 2008 10:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'd happily take Simpson & Fisher over Wells and Goddard. |
|
| Author: | SparkyBlue [ Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
ryan2000 wrote: I'd happily take Simpson & Fisher over Wells and Goddard.
No shit, I'd take either one of Simpson OR Fisher over both Wells and Goddard. Didn't they string up the fellow who was responsible for recruitment that year?!? 
|
|
| Author: | Virgin Blue [ Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I like the opening list, but I think Walker should be judged after 2008 injuries aside. If he's ever going to stand-up in the midfield, this will be the year you'd think. He certainly has the tank. |
|
| Author: | Sniff Wilson [ Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Judd - elite Fevola - elite Murphy - elite Gibbs - will become an elite Simpson - future leader and will blossom in 08 Kreuzer - will become elite (hopefully) Stevens - bleeds navy blue, workhorse unfortunately everyone else would be fair game. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|