Roast Carlton beaten tactically (AGAIN)

[Bluebear]

I would say Rich and Yarran are about even at this stage. But at the time we deemed them even so we drafted for need yet again and since Yarran was quite capable up forward as well we drafted him. So again not really a risk drafting Yarran who has more strings to his bow than Rich. Vickery was supposed to be a ruckman wasn't he? Why would we draft him if we got Kreuzer the year before?

So you're happy that we "needed a forward" and we got Yarran? How tall is he?

As for Gibbs well obviously not. At that time we were shit all over and needed midfielders with good disposal. Gibbs was the obvious choice and if the draft rule didn't change we would've had Selwood too no doubt about it. Pagan even mentioned how he would've loved to have got a Selwood into the side as well.

Lets presume for a minute that it takes KPP's 3-4 years to hit their straps, yet mids maybe 1-2.
If you were starting a team from scratch would you draft a mid year mids then KPP's/rucks, or the other way round. The arguement could be made that we needed defenders and should have taken Hansen, or neede a ruck (which we did) and should have taken Leuenberger, as we could always get a good mid in the first round the next year and they peak together.

Just playing devils advocate. I'm happy with how we have recruited.

Ok so we have Judd, Murphy, Gibbs, Simpson and Lucas. You're not sure on Brock? Do you think it was a mistake to trade our pick for him or do you think Brock deserves some more time? I'd say the latter.

Classic example of not understanding what I posted and taking it to the nth degree.

How has Brock gone? Not well? Do you KNOW that he is going to get better and play consistently, or do you just hope. What I said was there are four or so that loook to be quality enough you'd think they would be the core of a premier midfield. Some....not all.....but some of the others will make way. Brock is in the group that may......MAY make way. Given his output this year I'd think that's pretty hard to argue against.

Anyway, we have 5 mids who are a lock and possibly Yarran too. How many KPF's do we have? Hendo, Waite (Who I think should be playing down back) and who after that? Now I realize we don't need as many but we need more than putting our hope into Hendo because if it doesn't turn out as we hope we're stuffed.

So you think getting Hendo was a mistake?

(Right back at ya......see how nonsense that leap is?)

I do agree that we need a decent inside mid but that's what they got Mclean for isn't it? They took a risk with swapping the draft pick and I think its fair to say it hasn't payed off yet but Mclean might come good. Do you think they would've selected a Cunnington or Martin if they dropped after having just swapped pick 13 for Mclean? We'll never know but I would've wanted them to because we defintely need a decent inside mid as well but there was no way they would've fallen to us especially last year.

Re read what I posted. I think you missed the point about this again, re drafting types or for need rather than best available.

As for asking the Tigers, well we can ask the Saints and Hawks too.

 

[40yearBLUE]

Um we've had Aussie for 4 years now and he's still not a regular and he has been tried forward before too that's how I know.

And of course he is still on the list because his mum makes sandwiches for Ratts lunch, and despite your heated arguments with him and WH you just havent been able to convince either of the wisdom of your position

Because Levi has never shown that he has been capable of kicking big bags of goals that's why he slipped to the rookie draft, you know because there was a reason for it and every single recruiter could not possibly be wrong. You have to show signs of greatness before acheiving it you don't just obtain the ability to do something that you havn't been capable of your whole life. That's why he waas worth a try with a rookie selection with the hope of becoming a half decent option.

You are correct again, no rookie listed player ever made a name for himself despite being overlooked by all the other recruiters a number of times *cough" Barlow* cough* Jpod* Cough

Show me where I said I don't rate Hammer. I said he is mainly a ruckman that's his role that's what we drafted him (WRONG!)for not KPP prospect that's bullshit we drafted him to be a ruckman because at the time we didn't have any quality ruckman. Everybody knows this except you. I wish we had of gotten Tippett over Grigg though but then again why risk drafting a 'speculative' tall over a midfielder who you somehow know will be a gun. Really I don't see the point why would you do that?

So let me see, every recruiter that ever let slip a player taken later in a draft and ending up better than originally rated ought to be fired, leaving you with your pick of positions, and of course they would all be clambering to your door given your undisputed ability to draft the quality. Or is it that you are only a hindsight expert?

 

[Tanks_Alot]

So you're happy that we "needed a forward" and we got Yarran? How tall is he?

I think you've misunderstood what I meant. I meant we needed a small-medium forward considering we had Fev at the time. Plus the fact that he will be playing midfield a little too and was probably deemed equal to Rich talent wise, that wasn't a risk. I didn't say we drafted Yarran as a KPF so you asking me how tall he is has nothing to do with it.

Lets presume for a minute that it takes KPP's 3-4 years to hit their straps, yet mids maybe 1-2.
If you were starting a team from scratch would you draft a mid year mids then KPP's/rucks, or the other way round.

From ground up, I'd start with mids. I've never disputed the fact that the midfield is the most important part of a team.

The arguement could be made that we needed defenders and should have taken Hansen, or neede a ruck (which we did) and should have taken Leuenberger, as we could always get a good mid in the first round the next year and they peak together.

Again I'd say we were probably starting from ground up in 2005 and Murphy was not enough we needed to build a solid midfield. We needed everything back then maybe apart from a FF. Gibbs was clearly the option to take and I was very happy with that selection. I actually wanted Selwood after Gibbs, they were my top 2 of that draft.

Classic example of not understanding what I posted and taking it to the nth degree.

How has Brock gone? Not well? Do you KNOW that he is going to get better and play consistently, or do you just hope.

What I said was there are four or so that loook to be quality enough you'd think they would be the core of a premier midfield. Some....not all.....but some of the others will make way. Brock is in the group that may......MAY make way. Given his output this year I'd think that's pretty hard to argue against.

I said do you think getting Brock was a mistake or does he deserve more time? I also said I think the lattermeaning I believe he deserves more time to prove if the decision was any good. How you interpret that as me saying I know he's going to get better is baffling.

You say you're happy with our recruiting but you don't like the fact we got Brock and you also think we havn't covered the midfield sufficiently. You're contradicting yourself there.

You say Brock MAY have to make way after one season (which has been riddled with injury). So my question simply was do you think we should've kept pick 11 given the fact that you think Brock MAY have to make way for another inside midfielder for us to draft when we could've used that pick for something else?

So you think getting Hendo was a mistake?


(Right back at ya......see how nonsense that leap is?)

Re read what I posted. I think you missed the point about this again, re drafting types or for need rather than best available.

I'm not going to re read what you posted because I understood it perfectly. We need an inside mid so we would've drafted one especially if they were of a Martin or Cunnington calibre and I would've been happy.

And hey I'm not the one saying Hendo may...MAY have to make way. If any one of our KPF's have to make it, it would have to be Setanta. Besides we didn't give a pick away for Hendo, we gave away a disrespectful brat and not only got Hendo but a pick as well. Plus Hendo needs more development time than a mid so why would you ask me if I thought that was a mistake? Where have I shown signs that I wasn't happy with that bit of recruiting? You showed signs that you thought Brock might not be up to it hence I asked the question do you think it was a mistake? No need to rant and rave just a simple yes or no with a bit of justification was all I was after.

I was actually trying to have a decent discussion but you're trying to be a smart arse by placing embarrassing emoticons when you didn't understand what i was saying, asking me about the decision to get Hendo and the right back at ya crap when I showed no signs of thinking he has to make way for anyone and then asking me to re read your posts because I can't understand them as if they're written in Latin or something. No need for that mate this is a football forum and differing opinions and discussing them are what make it interesting.

 

[Tanks_Alot]

So let me see, every recruiter that ever let slip a player taken later in a draft and ending up better than originally rated ought to be fired, leaving you with your pick of positions, and of course they would all be clambering to your door given your undisputed ability to draft the quality. Or is it that you are only a hindsight expert?

Hammer was drafted to be a ruckman so your wrong. Accept it.

Now as for rookies, yeah some make it, how many? Actually no, don't tell me how many rookies make it how many rookie KPF's make it? JPod and who else? Plus JPod has showed many signs during his VFL career that he was capable of kicking bags on a regular basis and being a dominant forward I said Levi hasn't and he hasn't.

As for your smart arse remark about Aussie's mum making Ratts lunch that's why he's still there well he's been given his 4 years, let's see if he's still there after this year.

 

[Bluebear]

You say you're happy with our recruiting but you don't like the fact we got Brock and you also think we havn't covered the midfield sufficiently. You're contradicting yourself there.

Fiction. Quote me where I say I don't like the fact we got Brock. Again, you haven't understood me.

You say Brock MAY have to make way after one season (which has been riddled with injury). So my question simply was do you think we should've kept pick 11 given the fact that you think Brock MAY have to make way for another inside midfielder for us to draft when we could've used that pick for something else?

More fiction.
Where do I say Brock may have to make way after 1 season?

I'm not going to re read what you posted because I understood it perfectly.

Yes.........clearly.
Been to the Michael Voss school of self evaluation eh?

For the record. Happy with getting McLean despite his first year. Doesn't mean he is a "lock" for the future (i.e. next year and beyond there's a hint to where you went wrong above) and hence, along with others, might.......might lose his spot to a better player.

Unless your comprehension skills improve I'm not wasting my time on remedial lessons.
Cheers.
BB.

 

[Tanks_Alot]

Fiction. Quote me where I say I don't like the fact we got Brock. Again, you haven't understood me.

More fiction.
Where do I say Brock may have to make way after 1 season?

Yes.........clearly.
Been to the Michael Voss school of self evaluation eh?

For the record. Happy with getting McLean despite his first year. Doesn't mean he is a "lock" for the future (i.e. next year and beyond there's a hint to where you went wrong above) and hence, along with others, might.......might lose his spot to a better player.

Unless your comprehension skills improve I'm not wasting my time on remedial lessons.
Cheers.
BB.

Fiction Yeah? Where do you say brock may have to make way after 1 season? Well you did say he MAY have to make way right? How many seasons has he played for us? 1. So actually not even after 1 season with us you can foresee that he MAY have to make way. You're judging him on his first season with us. You're confident Lucas will be staying but not confident brock will be staying yet both are in their first season with us. The thing is you didn't understand. I'm not saying you wanna get rid of him after one year, I'm saying that you're judging him on his first season with us and your saying it's not likely that he will be staying given his performances and he probably won't if he doesn't improve, but I'm happy to give him another season before I decide whether he needs to make way for someone else.

You didn't directly say your unhappy with Brock but you've implied it with your comments saying how you're unhappy with our midfield recruiting then by saying he MAY have to make way for a replacement. You would think that replacement would be somebody better than him at his role right? Don't go and change tunes by saying your happy with him despite his first year after saying your not happy with our midfield recruiting and CLEARLY stating how you think he MAY have to be one to make room. You wouldn't be making that statement unless you judged him on his first year and that is what you have done. Also if not Brock then tell me, who are you upset with? You did say you're not happy with our midfield recruiting so who aren't you happy with if not Brock?

 

[Bluebear]

and your saying it's not likely that he will be staying given his performances and he probably won't if he doesn't improve, but I'm happy to give him another season before I decide whether he needs to make way for someone else.

Oh FFS.
This is what I said:
Those highlighted are locks IMO, and I would add Simpson.

I think questions remain over whether any of our other mids are good enough to be in a premiership team.
Let me clarify. Not all the others will be out of the team, but some will, and which of those is not clear.

Is it fair to say that after an injury riddles last few years and a less than stellar first year with us......that questions might remain? Or are you convinced that despite this year, he is a lock for our starting 22 in the years to come?

Anything else you come up with about what I said directly about Brock is Fiction.

You didn't directly say your unhappy with Brock but you've implied it with your comments saying how you're unhappy with our midfield recruiting then by saying he MAY have to make way for a replacement. You would think that replacement would be somebody better than him at his role right? Don't go and change tunes by saying your happy with him despite his first year after saying your not happy with our midfield recruiting and CLEARLY stating how you think he MAY have to be one to make room. You wouldn't be making that statement unless you judged him on his first year and that is what you have done. Also if not Brock then tell me, who are you upset with? You did say you're not happy with our midfield recruiting so who aren't you happy with if not Brock?

Look up implied.......then look up infered.
Where did I say I was unhappy with our midfield recruiting?
Again, you infered this from me saying only four or five are locks in my most humble opinion, and yes, that to me includes Lucas. Many of the others will stay and on their merits. Some will make way for better players, just as up until Kreuzers injury, Hampson and Wartnock made way. This doesn't instantly mean I think they are duds and were mistakes.

We will recruits more mids over the next few years. Some of them will replace some of our current mids. Some of our current mids, Brock included, may well step up, have injury free years, and cement a spot in our midfield.
All I said was it hasn't happened yet.
Agree?

 

[BlueGibbs2011]

Yep height has been changing for years. Cough Leo Barry Cough LeCras Cough Sam Fisher Cough Jason Blake Cough Goldsack Cough Luke McGuane Cough. Nealy all of these are 191cm (LeCras and Barry mid 180's), way too short for KP All but Barry still playing today. And heres an interesting argument. Using your logic, the odds of making it as a KP player if you were not exactly 191cm are extremely fraught given that so many successful KP players are 191cm today

And what you conveniently fail to cite is not only have heights changed but as has the game, and the CHF/FF role is less important in the structure of a flag winning team today, and HBF/CHB/FB often rotate in todays game to suit match ups. Even within matchups we often see talls play short and shorter players play tall. So agian the KPP role is not only less defined it is a shared role rather than a key role, but that fact seems to have escaped the chasm that might once have contained cerebral matter.

On the height thing, tell me of the current KPP players who are 185-189? There are pratically none so why list use them as part of your argument. THEY HAVE NO RELEVANCE TO TODAY. Le cras show how silly you are being. He is a fwd, not a KPP fwd in any way. you are mixing up up KPP and key player here. Le Cras is KEY to WCE scoring goals you muppet. Not a KPP player.

That is my point.

The ones you listed 190cm+ are fine. If you add that the probability argument in then players in today game being 190 cm and playing a KPP fwd/def role, then the odds are low and they are hard to find/draft...not impossible if you spend a high draft pick . This is why KPP are so hard to find with skill at the right height. Players who can play on 190-198 KPP oppositon players. Except for your rare as hens teeth examples, the 190 cm defender struggles on the 195+ fwds...no brainer really.

Walker at 190 cms will be fine versus some oppositions fwds but will struggle against the giants (Franklins) etc. All this means is that if we want him to hold down a KPP defensive role in games he will turn out pretty average as some weeks he does well and some weeks he does poorly. Oh funny that...another tall mid/utility type being forced to play the wrong position due to having little depth or quality down back.

Carlton have done nothing overly wrong with their drafting...but they do need to spend a high quality pick, not a rookie pick, not a 3rd rounder...but a first round pick on a 192-196 high quality hard nosed defender whose role is defending...not an in-between or utility type player. The club will know it for sure and will have it on their need list. But like others have said...we have needs in 1-2 other areas so between them they could get best available in the areas of KPP back/fwd, or HBF. Whichever falls first or closest.

 

[Tanks_Alot]

Oh FFS.
This is what I said:
Those highlighted are locks IMO, and I would add Simpson.

I think questions remain over whether any of our other mids are good enough to be in a premiership team.

Let me clarify. Not all the others will be out of the team, but some will, and which of those is not clear.

Is it fair to say that after an injury riddles last few years and a less than stellar first year with us......that questions might remain? Or are you convinced that despite this year, he is a lock for our starting 22 in the years to come?

Anything else you come up with about what I said directly about Brock is Fiction.

Look up implied.......then look up infered.
Where did I say I was unhappy with our midfield recruiting?
Again, you infered this from me saying only four or five are locks in my most humble opinion, and yes, that to me includes Lucas. Many of the others will stay and on their merits. Some will make way for better players, just as up until Kreuzers injury, Hampson and Wartnock made way. This doesn't instantly mean I think they are duds and were mistakes.

We will recruits more mids over the next few years. Some of them will replace some of our current mids. Some of our current mids, Brock included, may well step up, have injury free years, and cement a spot in our midfield.
All I said was it hasn't happened yet.
Agree?

Post 138: "No, I don't think we've covered the midfield sufficiently".

BTW I looked up implied here's what i found:

implied [ɪmˈplaɪd]
adj hinted at or suggested; not directly expressed an implied criticism

Yeah that's what I wanted to say. I looked up infered but it's spelt wrong. In fact you've spelt it wrong twice so I know it's not a typo. Let me help you, inferred is the correct way to spell the word I assume you meant to say.

In any case you did imply that you weren't happy with the midfield recruitment wise because you think we havn't covered it properly. They're your words and if you re-read your own posts you'll find them I promise.

And why are you telling me that you meant that some will be replaced and some won't and as to who those are is still unclear in big letters? Where did I say we have to get rid of all those you didn't highlight and where did I say that you were saying that. All I'm saying is you've put Brock under a cloud and said he MAY have to be replaced and i want to know why (according to you) Brock is under a cloud but Lucas isn't that's all (The others Judd, Murphy, Gibbs are obviously the top three at our club, Lucas isn't YET). Their both in their first year here, they've both been riddled with injuries. Now I know Brock's got more experience at AFL level but really his role for us is different to what his role was at Melbourne but I would expect a fit Brock to be a lock in our midfield ATM.

 

[Tanks_Alot]

On the height thing, tell me of the current KPP players who are 185-189? There are pratically none so why list use them as part of your argument. THEY HAVE NO RELEVANCE TO TODAY. Le cras show how silly you are being. He is a fwd, not a KPP fwd in any way. you are mixing up up KPP and key player here. Le Cras is KEY to WCE scoring goals you muppet. Not a KPP player.

That is my point.

The ones you listed 190cm+ are fine. If you add that the probability argument in then players in today game being 190 cm and playing a KPP fwd/def role, then the odds are low and they are hard to find/draft...not impossible if you spend a high draft pick . This is why KPP are so hard to find with skill at the right height. Players who can play on 190-198 KPP oppositon players. Except for your rare as hens teeth examples, the 190 cm defender struggles on the 195+ fwds...no brainer really.

Walker at 190 cms will be fine versus some oppositions fwds but will struggle against the giants (Franklins) etc. All this means is that if we want him to hold down a KPP defensive role in games he will turn out pretty average as some weeks he does well and some weeks he does poorly. Oh funny that...another tall mid/utility type being forced to play the wrong position due to having little depth or quality down back.

Carlton have done nothing overly wrong with their drafting...but they do need to spend a high quality pick, not a rookie pick, not a 3rd rounder...but a first round pick on a 192-196 high quality hard nosed defender whose role is defending...not an in-between or utility type player. The club will know it for sure and will have it on their need list. But like others have said...we have needs in 1-2 other areas so between them they could get best available in the areas of KPP back/fwd, or HBF. Whichever falls first or closest.

I figured this out last year. He simply has NFI what the difference is between KPP and a key player.

 

[40yearBLUE]

I figured this out last year. He simply has NFI what the difference is between KPP and a key player.

You obviously spend all your time watching 72's fantastic footy flashbacks and have taken absolutely no notice of the way the game has evolved over the last 10 - 15 years. Single dimensional players like Fev are a throwback and the rarity these days. Even the defined full back role is changing and the need for specialists like Scarlett is diminishing each year or I should say, the need for Scarlett to play like a traditional full back (and Lake is another) has changed as the role of FF and the rigid spine structure has changed. You might see a chap called Sheedy coaching in those flashback games you seem to watch, and note he was one of the pioneers at having players master more than one position on the ground. Now it is almost universally accepted practice. All concepts hard for you to grasp, I know. So yes I know the difference between a KP player and a key player, its a shame you haven't kept up with the nuances of the modern game but hey what the hell do I care.

Gotta go now, Aussie's mum has dinner ready.

 

[BlueGibbs2011]

You obviously spend all your time watching 72's fantastic footy flashbacks and have taken absolutely no notice of the way the game has evolved over the last 10 - 15 years. Single dimensional players like Fev are a throwback and the rarity these days. Even the defined full back role is changing and the need for specialists like Scarlett is diminishing each year or I should say, the need for Scarlett to play like a traditional full back (and Lake is another) has changed as the role of FF and the rigid spine structure has changed. You might see a chap called Sheedy coaching in those flashback games you seem to watch, and note he was one of the pioneers at having players master more than one position on the ground. Now it is almost universally accepted practice. All concepts hard for you to grasp, I know. So yes I know the difference between a KP player and a key player, its a shame you haven't kept up with the nuances of the modern game but hey what the hell do I care.

Gotta go now, Aussie's mum has dinner ready.

You accuse us of living in the past but it is you citing playersfrom the past lol. And KPP who are under 190cm...also a thing that is now being surpassed except for 1-2 extraordinary players.

Aside from being 'just so wrong on things' I still take my hat off to you 30YBlue. If you were a player, i'd def say you were an inside mid - the highest accolade i can give for your tenacity for posting non stop!

When i think of you, I tend to think of Apollo Creed smashing stallone in one of the rocky movies and rocky just keep coming back for more. And yes, like him you will win the day but only on the useless stat of word count numbers. Something you are very familair and comfortable with..useless stats without a semblence of analysis.

PS
The benefit of being in London right now means I will have the last post of each day..bruhaha!