Opinion 2016 Best 22

[Jeremias]

If optimism won matches we are headed for the Grand Final if the selected team is "very solid". Of those named:

Believe it or not but negativity doesn't have to be the default position of Carlton supporters heading into 2016 despite it being your modus operandi.

With so many fresh faces at the club - both on and off the field - fans have every right to be excited about what a new year may bring.

I was going to nitpick your post point-by-point, but I won't bother. Suffice to say it seems you may be playing devil's advocate by contesting many of those put forward as best 22 possibilities by Blue__Balls despite putting the same players - or players in similar circumstances - in your own version earlier in this thread.

 

[Love the Drake]

Believe it or not but negativity doesn't have to be the default position of Carlton supporters heading into 2016 despite it being your modus operandi.

With so many fresh faces at the club - both on and off the field - fans have every right to be excited about what a new year may bring.

I was going to nitpick your post point-by-point, but I won't bother. Suffice to say it seems you may be playing devil's advocate by contesting many of those put forward as best 22 possibilities by Blue__Balls despite putting the same players - or players in similar circumstances - in your own version earlier in this thread.

.
Couldn't agree more. That's the beauty of this thread. With a new coach, new game plan, 15 new players and certain players training the house down, there are over 30 players putting their hand up for selection.

This is an opinion thread asking Carlton fans to post what we think is best 22.

There is no right and wrong; we are just putting up opinions. Keep them coming..

 

[TeeJay Blue]

It's been a month or two. Judging by all the training reports and the words coming out of the club, I thought I take a stab at another guess of what the best 22 would look like. I also added what I would like to see below it.

WHAT I THINK THE BEST 22 WOULD LOOK LIKE:

FB - Simon White, Michael Jamison, Jacob Weitering
HB - Zach Tuohy, Dylan Buckley, Kade Simpson
C - Sam Kerridge, Patrick Cripps, Sam Docherty
HF - Matthew Wright, Andrejs Everitt, Dale Thomas
FF - Dennis Armfield, Levi Casboult, Andrew Phillips
R - Matthew Kreuzer, Marc Murphy, Ed Curnow

I - Blaine Boekhorst, Bryce Gibbs, Mark Whiley, Andrew Walker

E - Sam Rowe, David Cuningham, Jason Tutt

WHAT I WOULD LIKE FOR THE BEST 22 TO BE:

FB - Zach Tuohy, Michael Jamison, Jacob Weitering
HB - Ciaran Byrne, Dylan Buckley, Lachie Plowman (No need to hurry him back if still in rehabilitation. Simon White could take this spot)
C - Sam Kerridge, Nick Graham, Blaine Boekhorst
HF - Dennis Armfield, Andrejs Everitt, Dale Thomas
FF - Jed Lamb, Levi Casboult, Matthew Wright
R - Matthew Kreuzer, Patrick Cripps, Marc Murphy

I - Andrew Walker, Bryce Gibbs, Kade Simpson, Ed Curnow

E - Jed Lamb, Andrew Phillips, Simon White

This is still extremely difficult to do.

- I'm hearing that Mark Whiley is doing extremely well in the training sessions, I believe that he could bring something to the table this year.
- Really would like Kristian Jaksch to prove me wrong. At the moment, I just don't feel like we are going to get anything from him.
- I would love to see Charlie Curnow and David Cuningham to get plenty of game time this year.
- Sam Rowe might till keep his spot. I'm just judging by what I'm hearing about certain players.

 

[Big Sim is Back]

he was poor last year but he was way off in regards to his fitness. i think he has elite talent. can run find space cut through packs and use the ball well. could be a harder version of yarran. imo its all down to how much he wants it and so far his pre season has been very good.

Kid was bottom age first year player taken with a pick in the 60s. Got seven senior games presumably on merit but in the worst team in the comp the end he was chucked in was very deep indeed. Deserves some slack re 2015.

 

[Chalky Blues]

1. Weitering is a first year tall. Kosi was the last first year tall to become a regular (and a fat lot of good it did for him long term). 6-9 games tops please.
.

I thought Harry Taylor played 21 games in his first year and not having a bad career to date and didn't Daniel Talia win the rising star award after we told him he wasn't wanted at Carlton

 

[Big Sim is Back]

Not sure if this has already been posted...

SEN's crack at our best 22 with players ranked on importance to team...

Another wooden spoon and the departure of a few senior heads (plus the coach) sees Carlton enter 2016 with a whole new look. How will the fare? Our experts list the best Blues' lineup as well as ranking the players in terms of importance.

BEST 22
Backs: Zac Tuohy | Michael Jamison | Jacob Weitering
Half Backs: Sam Docherty | Sam Rowe | Kade Simpson
Centres: Bryce Gibbs | | Patrick Cripps | Sam Kerridge
Half Forwards: Andrew Walker | Matthew Kreuzer | Dale Thomas
Forwards: Matthew Wright | Levi Casboult | Andrejs Everitt
Rucks: Cameron Wood | Ed Curnow | Marc Murphy
Interchange: Simon White | Dylan Buckley | Nick Graham | Mark Whiley


IMPORTANCE RANKINGS
1. Patrick Cripps
2. Marc Murphy
3. Andrejs Everitt
4. Kade Simpson
5. Bryce Gibbs
6. Matthew Kreuzer
7. Sam Docherty
8. Dale Thomas
9. Michael Jamison
10. Andrew Walker
11. Sam Rowe
12. Zac Tuohy
13. Dylan Buckley
14. Levi Casboult
15. Ed Curnow
16. Sam Kerridge
17. Simon White
18. Cameron Wood
19. Kristian Jaksch
20. Matthew Wright
21. Daniel Gorringe
22. Andrew Phillips
23. Nick Graham
24. Dennis Armfield
25. Liam Jones
26. Mark Whiley
27. Lachie Plowman
28. Jason Tutt
29. Blaine Boekhorst
30. Jed Lamb
31. Clem Smith
32. Liam Sumner
33. Matthew Dick
34. Ciaran Byrne
35. Ciaran Sheehan

NOTE:

- Players are ranked in terms of importance to the team.
- Only includes players who have played at least one senior match.


http://www.sen.com.au/news/02-16/best-22-and-player-rankings-carlton#WmY0OeuuqdIqVC4v.97

They have cam wood starting? If he is in our round one team I will eat a wheelie bin full of medical waste.

 

[BlueJet]

I thought Harry Taylor played 21 games in his first year and not having a bad career to date and didn't Daniel Talia win the rising star award after we told him he wasn't wanted at Carlton

Harry Taylor was a mature age recruit and Dan played 9 games in his first year.
It's unusual for KPP to set the world on fire in their first few years.

Sent from my SM-N915G using Tapatalk

 

[JustaBattler]

I'm pretty comfortable for a supposed weak midfield to include; Thomas/Gibbs/Murphy/Kreuzer/Curnow/Cripps in the mix

 

[Chalky Blues]

Harry Taylor was a mature age recruit and Dan played 9 games in his first year.
It's unusual for KPP to set the world on fire in their first few years.

Sent from my SM-N915G using Tapatalk

So did Talia win Rising star in his 2nd year then?

 

[BlueJet]

So did Talia win Rising star in his 2nd year then?

Scratch that, he didn't play at all in his first, 9 games in his second and won the award in his third.

 

[HARKER]

I'm pretty comfortable for a supposed weak midfield to include; Thomas/Gibbs/Murphy/Kreuzer/Curnow/Cripps in the mix

Not sure it will work but I'm seeing Smith involved in the middle quite a bit.
(P.S. Smith wasn't a bottom ager in his draft year)

Kerridge will be there though and I feel Docherty should be.
Maybe even Thomas from time to time.

 

[Doro]

It's been a month or two. Judging by all the training reports and the words coming out of the club, I thought I take a stab at another guess of what the best 22 would look like. I also added what I would like to see below it.

WHAT I THINK THE BEST 22 WOULD LOOK LIKE:

FB - Simon White, Michael Jamison, Jacob Weitering
HB - Zach Tuohy, Dylan Buckley, Kade Simpson
C - Sam Kerridge, Patrick Cripps, Sam Docherty
HF - Matthew Wright, Andrejs Everitt, Dale Thomas
FF - Dennis Armfield, Levi Casboult, Andrew Phillips
R - Matthew Kreuzer, Marc Murphy, Ed Curnow

I - Blaine Boekhorst, Bryce Gibbs, Mark Whiley, Andrew Walker

E - Sam Rowe, David Cuningham, Jason Tutt

WHAT I WOULD LIKE FOR THE BEST 22 TO BE:

FB - Zach Tuohy, Michael Jamison, Jacob Weitering
HB - Ciaran Byrne, Dylan Buckley, Lachie Plowman (No need to hurry him back if still in rehabilitation. Simon White could take this spot)
C - Sam Kerridge, Nick Graham, Blaine Boekhorst
HF - Dennis Armfield, Andrejs Everitt, Dale Thomas
FF - Jed Lamb, Levi Casboult, Matthew Wright
R - Matthew Kreuzer, Patrick Cripps, Marc Murphy

I - Andrew Walker, Bryce Gibbs, Kade Simpson, Ed Curnow

E - Jed Lamb, Andrew Phillips, Simon White

This is still extremely difficult to do.

- I'm hearing that Mark Whiley is doing extremely well in the training sessions, I believe that he could bring something to the table this year.
- Really would like Kristian Jaksch to prove me wrong. At the moment, I just don't feel like we are going to get anything from him.
- I would love to see Charlie Curnow and David Cuningham to get plenty of game time this year.
- Sam Rowe might till keep his spot. I'm just judging by what I'm hearing about certain players.

Dylbucks has stripped Armfield of CHB? Controversial

 

[Big Sim is Back]

Not sure it will work but I'm seeing Smith involved in the middle quite a bit.
(P.S. Smith wasn't a bottom ager in his draft year)

Kerridge will be there though and I feel Docherty should be.
Maybe even Thomas from time to time.

My mistake.

Still think he was OK last year all things considered.

 

[Big Sim is Back]

Dylbucks has stripped Armfield of CHB? Controversial

Army is going into the ruck.

 

[Windhover]

Believe it or not but negativity doesn't have to be the default position of Carlton supporters heading into 2016 despite it being your modus operandi.

I agree my post was negative, but I think you miss the target of that negativity. I am delighted with everything that has happened since 26 May 2015 and I am an uncritical supporter of the players we have drafted/recruited since then. My negativity is directed and supporters who, in their enthusiasm, run away with the pixies. My point in short is that if Blue Balls team is best 22 then there are 12 players who have, as yet, shown nothing consistently at the level in that 22. To call that team "very solid", as Shan Dog did (and SD has since made a sort of apology for the description) is to run so far ahead of any reality that, IMO, it actively misleads by over-inflating expectations.

Thus the point of my negativity is to make it plain that this year is not going to be a pretty one for us - even if an amazing 6 of those 12 prove to be reasonable quality AFL footballers. And, if that is so, you can take it from me I will not be yelling for Bolton to be sacked. I am likely to be very pleased indeed. And I hope others are listening so that Bolton, among big footy supporters, can be given time beyond losses to show if he can coach.

With so many fresh faces at the club - both on and off the field - fans have every right to be excited about what a new year may bring.

I was going to nitpick your post point-by-point, but I won't bother.

That's a pity. I am probably among a minority of posters that actively enjoys my perceived errors being exposed.

Suffice to say it seems you may be playing devil's advocate by contesting many of those put forward as best 22 possibilities by Blue__Balls despite putting the same players - or players in similar circumstances - in your own version earlier in this thread.

Umm, you mean you are referring to my post at 350? Really? You meant to put a smiley face on that comment, surely.

 

[bluedabadee]

Have held off making an offering because so many are in contention, but with a couple of exceptions I keep coming up with the same best 22 for round 1. Excluding Plowman and Sumner, who will be underdone and the rookies except tor Byrne who should earn the nomination, with Sheehan having to bide his time until mid season or LTI promotion.
Loving Cuningham, and will earn his spot during the season, but some of the older boys will probably get first crack. Weitering a lock on reports. Charlie, as per Cuningham will force his way in, just a toss up for R1 unless AW1 misses.

B: Tuohy, Jamison, Weitering
HB: Docherty, Rowe, Byrne
C: Simpson, Gibbs, Boekhorst
HF: Kerridge, Casboult, Everitt
F: Thomas, Walker, Phillips
Foll: Kreuzer, Cripps, Murphy
Int: E.Curnow, White, Graham, Buckley (Wright, Lamb, Gorringe. Whiley reportedly, Charlie and Cuningham in the mix.


Leaves
B: Dick, Glass-McCasker, Plowman
HB: Viojo-Rainbow, Jaksch, Sheehan
C: Tutt, Whiley, Armfield
HF: Smith, McKay, C.Curnow
F: Lamb, Foster, Wright
Foll: Gorringe, Cuningham, Gowers
The rest are a bloody talented lot to potentially miss in VFL including:
Jones, Wood, Silvagni, Sumner, Gallucci and Korcheck

Those in italics could figure in best 22 without surprise.
Bolded likely to become best 22 during year.
Underlined would not surprise to force their way in to best 22.
Assuming Harry, Jack and Jesse to need a year or more of development

Our rebuild has been brilliant.

Spot on.
Would love to see Kreuzer given the chance to play the position he was born for a la Goldstein.
Phillips' hard leading and marking at full stretch at training has been a revelation...would love to see him given a chance to do what * have been waiting for three years for Daniher to do.
As for other posts regarding Weitering; would be surprised if he doesn't play at least 18 games this year.

 

[Soapy V]

kruezer is a pure ruckman who can pinch hit forward. imo not a forward at all. phillips putting pressure on is a good thing. be interesting to see of they play both. the other option is gorringe or casboult as a part time back up. with four on bench and limited interchange im not sure how they will do it.

i really want to see kruezer play 80% ruck ala a goldstein. thats why he went no. 1

 

[Blue__Balls]

I agree my post was negative, but I think you miss the target of that negativity. I am delighted with everything that has happened since 26 May 2015 and I am an uncritical supporter of the players we have drafted/recruited since then. My negativity is directed and supporters who, in their enthusiasm, run away with the pixies. My point in short is that if Blue Balls team is best 22 then there are 12 players who have, as yet, shown nothing consistently at the level in that 22. To call that team "very solid", as Shan Dog did (and SD has since made a sort of apology for the description) is to run so far ahead of any reality that, IMO, it actively misleads by over-inflating expectations.

Thus the point of my negativity is to make it plain that this year is not going to be a pretty one for us - even if an amazing 6 of those 12 prove to be reasonable quality AFL footballers. And, if that is so, you can take it from me I will not be yelling for Bolton to be sacked. I am likely to be very pleased indeed. And I hope others are listening so that Bolton, among big footy supporters, can be given time beyond losses to show if he can coach.

Where did I say it's our best 22?

My first sentence was "Hoping that we're lining up something like this by the back end of the year".

I go on to specify four senior players who I expect to play the majority of games this year, but qualify that I'd expect a few of the younger talents to go past them by season's end.

Shandog said it looked solid (=/= Grand Final material) and that if those young guys are pushing into the team by the end of the season we're doing very well (ie. good development) or very poorly (ie. injuries or terrible form from senior players).

I'll reiterate - that list is one I hope to see playing by the end of the season (let's call it the last 2-3 rounds). Weitering shouldn't play 22 games this year, neither should Curnow, nor Cuningham. But if we want them playing regularly next season, then in my view they should be demanding selection late in the season, and they should be given a run of games at the expense of some of our older players. Why play Rowe over Weitering in rounds 21-23 when we'd hope that Rowe will be relegated to depth next year? Ditto Walker vs. Curnow, with 1AW potentially on the cusp of retirement?

You've clearly got a persona you like to push, and you've gone the premeditated attack on a list with plenty of youth, but you're off the mark with your criticism this time.

 

[Jeremias]

I agree my post was negative, but I think you miss the target of that negativity.

You thought wrong. In this instance your negativity was clearly directed at certain other posters. There was no need for it & we don't want to see it.

That's a pity. I am probably among a minority of posters that actively enjoys my perceived errors being exposed.

How does that saying go - something about banging heads against a brick wall?

Umm, you mean you are referring to my post at 350? Really? You meant to put a smiley face on that comment, surely.

Time to consider being a little less condescending - it doesn't suit you.

I was actually referring to your initial post in this thread. Post #25, bottom of the first page.

 

[Windhover]

Suffice to say it seems you may be playing devil's advocate by contesting many of those put forward as best 22 possibilities by Blue__Balls despite putting the same players - or players in similar circumstances - in your own version earlier in this thread.

I was actually referring to your initial post in this thread. Post #25, bottom of the first page.

Thanks for that. My mistake.

Although you claim to understand the point of my initial post (to dampen excessive enthusiasm for unproven players so that unrealistic expectations do not sour supporters when a "very solid" 22 turns out to be more like switching deck chairs) your claim that I must not be sincere in my post (playing devil's advocate) because I put Jaksch and Weitering in my post at 25 (they are the only 2 of the 12 I nominated) and included Sheehan (who fits the category of unproven) suggests otherwise.

By putting Weitering, Jaksch and Sheehan in the team (and also Warnock, who was then still on our list) it was my prediction of best 22. There was no suggestion the team I selected was a "very solid" team. But, in any case, even pessimistic me would allow that we might have 3 players improve to AFL level quality. I did after all say I would be very happy for 6 to improve to that extent. But 12 players improve to that extent and form part of a very solid team in a single season? I cannot myself recall when anything close to that number have ever gone from zeros to heroes. Can you? Essendon in 1993 had 6 in Fletcher, Calthorpe, Mercuri, Olarenshaw, Misiti and Turd who went from zero based on previous year's performance and that was, rightly, regarded as very "special" (unfortunately).

 

[therubbernub]

Not sure it will work but I'm seeing Smith involved in the middle quite a bit.
(P.S. Smith wasn't a bottom ager in his draft year)

Kerridge will be there though and I feel Docherty should be.
Maybe even Thomas from time to time.

I think Wright will see some midfield time as well

 

[JustaBattler]

Not sure it will work but I'm seeing Smith involved in the middle quite a bit.
(P.S. Smith wasn't a bottom ager in his draft year)

Kerridge will be there though and I feel Docherty should be.
Maybe even Thomas from time to time.

Down back is looking much deeper:

Tuohey, Jamison, Weitering/White/Buckley/Plowman/Byrne/Sheehan
Docherty Rowe Simpson

In the center six : Everitt Gibbs Boekhurst/Kerridge/E.Curnow/P.Cripps/M/Murphy/Thomas ( Graham/Whiley/Phillips/Tutt? Cuningham ) with some indications that Simpson might be running on wing occasionally - Smith/Byrne/Docherty/Lamb also potential cameo
appearances

Up front is the tougher bit : and I expect all of Kreuzer/Gorringe/Phillips to be rotated through CHF/HFF as well as resting Murphy/Thomas/Cripps to bolster up certain starters in: Walker/Casboult - small defensive pressure and capable of snagging goals provides opportunity for noobie players and second year players to impress: Smith/Lamb/DeG/Tutt?/Buckley?/Cuningham?/C.Curnow?

Backs and mids are better positioned as far as depth in 2016 ( still soem way to go) but up front - experience and class in smalls and mid talls will make it harder.

Still I am happier with list than in years- direction and type of player body we are recruiting is now at least on par with other teams. We are all of a sudden not short of talls and body size in engine room.

If I see Murphy played in center bounces as default position - it will be a negative indicator on Whiley/Graham/E.Curnow/Gibbs - this year we shoudl see Murphy 'unleashed' and used for his strength(s) endurance/running and smarts-if Thomas is fit - same.

Smith/Cuningham/Lamb/Tutt/Buckley will all be vying for similar rotating roles through HBF/mid or HFF mid...

The aces up sleeve are Plowman/Gorringe/Lamb/C.Curnow....all could be starting 22 sooner rather than later.

Bolton - will reward each way runners and team players - the era of 'star bludger' is over - thankfully.

 

[ShanDog]

To call that team "very solid", as Shan Dog did (and SD has since made a sort of apology for the description) is to run so far ahead of any reality that, IMO, it actively misleads by over-inflating expectations.

FFS Windhover, no I have not apologised for anything. For someone who clearly considers themselves to be so articulate and intelligent, you have a poor level of comprehension.

Let me actually clarify what I mean by it being a 'solid team':

Assuming the team Blue__Balls put up was playing well and competitively, the structure of the 22 (talls & smalls, inside & outside etc) was solid. There was a good mix, plenty of youth and some older heads. Plenty of speed but some good contested ball winning ability. Dash off the back line and targets up forward. Solid.

Given that it was clearly articulated as a projection and 'here's hoping' post, I have no idea why you chose to use it as some sort of platform for a potshot at people who are 'running away with the pixies' or why on earth you would think that anyone 'actively misleading' on BigFooty has any sort of effect beyond a ripple in an ocean. You are just not in touch with reality.

The idea of self-administering a used catheter fills my day with more brightness than the thought of reading your posts.

 

[Windhover]

FFS Windhover, no I have not apologised for anything.
For someone who clearly considers themselves to be so articulate and intelligent, you have a poor level of comprehension.

True, at least to my poor level of comprehension since I kind of thought this . . .

Holy ******* balls batman, it was a three sentence post written in ten seconds on my phone during a coffee break. Take it for what it is instead of dissecting the wording.
Lighten up and thanks for telling me all about what I meant.

. . . with its reference to being written in 10 s on a phone in a coffee break to be something of an admission that perhaps you hadn't quite expressed yourself as you might have had you had the time. But I shall certainly try to follow your "enlightening up example" of spluttering expletives, if ****** poorly.

Let me actually clarify what I mean by it being a 'solid team':

Assuming the team Blue__Balls put up was playing well and competitively, the structure of the 22 (talls & smalls, inside & outside etc) was solid. There was a good mix, plenty of youth and some older heads. Plenty of speed but some good contested ball winning ability. Dash off the back line and targets up forward. Solid.

Fair enough. I withdraw my previous post completely. But to be fair to me how was I supposed to know that when you use the phrase "solid team" it is actually a conditional phrase, based on an assumption* that "the team put up was playing well and competitively". I mean of course if all those players are part of the team and playing well and competitively it will be a "solid team". No dispute with that at all.

* The relevance of your post, based as it is on the "assumption" must however be questioned. The point of my original post in reply to you was to underline how unlikely it is that we will have 12 players step up and show by the end of the year that they are at the level. If you do not think your assumption unlikely (unprecedented to my knowledge) perhaps you can tell me when, ever, a team has had as many as 12 players step up and show that they are at the level in a single year.

Finally, for the benefit of those who like to comment on my style of posting I do not regard my position as being "negative"; I regard it as "reality testing". I mean, if I posted that "if Jones can turn it around and kick 150 goals this year we will be a realistic grand finalist", would you regard that as a useful speculation? Or would you like to gently suggest to me that perhaps such a turn around is quite unprecedented?

Now where is that used ****** syringe.

 

[ShanDog]

Fair enough. I withdraw my previous post completely. But to be fair to me how was I supposed to know that when you use the phrase "solid team" it is actually a conditional phrase, based on an assumption* that "the team put up was playing well and competitively". I mean of course if all those players are part of the team and playing well and competitively it will be a "solid team". No dispute with that at all.

Then perhaps it was a mistake to labour a point that wasn't clear to begin with.

If you do not think your assumption unlikely (unprecedented to my knowledge) perhaps you can tell me when, ever, a team has had as many as 12 players step up and show that they are at the level in a single year.

Very subjective - I already think a number of those you pointed out have shown an ability to step up or continual improvement each year. None of those players in the 22 Blue Balls listed are losing ability, incapable of improvement or unimportant IMHO. The hope is that trend continuing in 2016.