The recent comments made by Williams and Malthouse along the lines of Carlton being blessed with No. 1 or high draft picks has been laughable to me.
At the very least Conolly in this article has been able to assess our improved performances more objectively:
Quote:
Gutsy efforts all, with contributions coming across the board. And in the process providing plenty of evidence that Carlton's revival isn't simply about the draft benefits of finishing on or near the bottom of ladder several years in a row.
and this
Quote:
It doesn't do the Blues justice. Sure, Marc Murphy and Matthew Kreuzer were among their best yesterday, but so were Brendan Fevola, Heath Scotland and Cameron Cloke.
Fevola was picked at No. 38 in the 1998 national draft, hardly a gold-plated selection. And while he may have proved a goalkicking genius, Carlton has spent a good decade nurturing him, forgiving him and showing patience above and beyond what many other clubs might have.
Scotland and Cloke were Collingwood cast-offs, the midfielder traded for a No. 35 draft pick, the ruckman picked up by the Blues at the pre-season draft. Best-and-fairest winner Andrew Carrazzo was a rookie, Adam Bentick, Bret Thornton and Simon Wiggins hardly blue-chip stock, either.
IMO The blues wins this season have not been based on the sole performance of our "large" no. of high draft picks but more as a result of a collective improvement of the team across the board. The fact that we have a few high draft pick players who are in the
process of becomming stars is a moot point. As we all know, just because you take a player early in the draft that does not guarantee you success.