Essendon v Carlton: Rate the Lists

[BlueJet]

Stop making me defend Carlton. It's not right, dammit.

I know the feeling, being nice about Essendons prospects is difficult/sickening. lol

 

[Jade]

so on and so forth.

But really, an exercise that could be applied to any team. The reality is (IMO of course) that this Carlton list does not have the quality. Even if the stars aligned as you suggested, you'd have to ALSO rely on other teams not having the same luck. That is, it's best is not better than everyone else. It's best is not even roughly equivalent to the better sides.

Murphy for example has been (and I really don't want to use the word exposed due to it's trollish 'feel') shown up as a step or two below the true elite midfielders of the game. Similar to say a Brent Stanton (different players I know) in that whilst he can be an extremely useful contributor, he's incapable of carrying the lead himself.

Kreuzer - how long do you carry the torch for this bloke before you finally admit to yourselves (Carlton fans in general that is), that whilst a genuinely talented and useful player, he is NOT elite and is incredibly unlikely to be regarded as such.

Check this out:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgLKijCCUAAb3sd.jpg:large

I didn't verify the information myself, so I'm relying on it being accurate, but geez, if correct that is bloody damning. The second oldest list in the league, and I think agreed by all not currently a flag threat. Now don't get me wrong, I really dislike people pointing to the youth of their side as a pointer that their list is in good nick - but it's a horrible and sobering stat if you are a Carlton supporter.

Is all that likely? Doubtful that it is, but one thing I've learned about footy over the years, is that it's unpredictable what's going to happen next. No one would have been guessing the Lions to 3-peat back in 1999, but loh and behold.

Sure is - but if it came about it would be against the conventional wisdom, which is kind of my point. On what we can see, evaluate and judge, Carlton's list is in very poor shape.

As for the chances of this list winning a flag, I think it depends on what can be achieved regarding the coming years recruitment. Certainly with guys like Murphy, Thomas, Henderson, Gibbs, Menzel, Yarran, Kreuzer, Garlett, etc on the list, there's a reasonable core to keep building around, rather than being 10 years away from a flag with a total rebuild as you've suggested.

And this is where I genuinely believe that the Carlton faithful are genuinely suffering from a rose tinted belief not rooted in reality. Murphy, Thomas, Henderson etc is NOT a reasonable core to build around; and this is the fundamental difference in our opinions. I reckon I could write a similar list of players for every club, and for most that 'core' would be significantly better than Carlton. In relation to this poll, a list consisting of Heppell, Zaharakis, Carlisle, Daniher, Ryder, Bellchambers, Hurley, Hibberd, Hooker, Melksham, Myers...... it's diabolically skewed in Essendon's favour.

 

[Jade]

Let's be honest, your hatred of Carlton has a little to do with it too.

Ha ha, my hatred for Carlton has a lot to do with the ENJOYMENT of it, but not the analysis itself.

At present it's not set up to win a flag, I'm not sure anyone would say otherwise, we do however have hopes for some of our younger blokes to take a step up from promising young players to regular contributors to help fill the void for the older fellas who are on the way out.

Which to be fair, is a hope shared by seventeen other clubs. Nothing we've seen says Carlton are going to have a better strike rate at this.

Your mob managed to take a step forward last year through drastic unforeseen improvement from Carlisle/Hooker/Hibberd etc + the recruitment of Goddard, there's nothing to say we can't make a similar improvement.

Really have to strongly disagree with that. Carlisle, Hooker and Hibberd were pre-existing, KNOWN talents that simply needed time. Carlisle and Hooker were always touted as 200 game players - they aren't a bolt out of nowhere. And Hibberd would have STARTED 2013 in most Essendon fans top 5 or 10 players.

And as for Goddard; he was already an established elite player - not sure how that can be unforseen.

 

[Jade]

Stop making me defend Carlton. It's not right, dammit.

I know the feeling, being nice about Essendons prospects is difficult/sickening. lol

Been a better conversation thus far than the god awful North Melbourne list reviews......

 

[Monkey King]

But really, an exercise that could be applied to any team. The reality is (IMO of course) that this Carlton list does not have the quality. Even if the stars aligned as you suggested, you'd have to ALSO rely on other teams not having the same luck. That is, it's best is not better than everyone else. It's best is not even roughly equivalent to the better sides.

The thing is it never happens to every side. Some step up and others don't. If I'm looking at potentials I take this into consideration. It's why some clubs rise up the ladder and others don't; or why the same club doesn't usually win flag after flag until their key players retire. Its up and down up and down and who lands on the right number when the wheel stops spinning. Look at Sydney of a couple of seasons ago; almost came from nowhere to win a flag.

Your comments on Murphy I take with a grain of salt. He's had two years affected by injury and done enough to show he's a top mid when getting a good run at it. The fact you say he's on Stanton's level sums up how crap your opinions are on Carlton players. On Kreuzer, the bloke is talented & had a dog run with injury since doing his knee. Hasn't realised his potential, may never realise it, but it's there & he's soon moving into that age group where ruckmen come into their own.

Check this out:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgLKijCCUAAb3sd.jpg:large

I didn't verify the information myself, so I'm relying on it being accurate, but geez, if correct that is bloody damning. The second oldest list in the league, and I think agreed by all not currently a flag threat.

The young-old thing doesn't mean much to me beyond the next year or two. How many young lists have you seen that go nowhere, even after doing well. I mean Collingwood ended up 8th last year and had the youngest premiership side in modern history just a couple of years ago. There's many a slip twixt a cup and lip.

Nonetheless, I've seen other lists that place us around 3rd or 4th oldest, up 6 places on last year (from memory) but I must say when looking at the sides around us, I'd say we're in a reasonable place age wise to have a shot at seeing our best. The ages will drop in the coming years as certain players retire, just as we;ve risen this year, and all that matters is that the younger blokes under them develop. How that goes is anyone's guess, so there's point claiming clairvoyance as to the outcome.

And this is where I genuinely believe that the Carlton faithful are genuinely suffering from a rose tinted belief not rooted in reality. Murphy, Thomas, Henderson etc is NOT a reasonable core to build around; and this is the fundamental difference in our opinions. I reckon I could write a similar list of players for every club, and for most that 'core' would be significantly better than Carlton. In relation to this poll, a list consisting of Heppell, Zaharakis, Carlisle, Daniher, Ryder, Bellchambers, Hurley, Hibberd, Hooker, Melksham, Myers...... it's diabolically skewed in Essendon's favour.

Let's just say the rose coloured glasses come in many shapes and sizes buddy.

I'll look forward to coming back here in the future when results becomes enshrined and opinions become meaningless.

 

[Monkey King]

Really have to strongly disagree with that. Carlisle, Hooker and Hibberd were pre-existing, KNOWN talents that simply needed time. Carlisle and Hooker were always touted as 200 game players - they aren't a bolt out of nowhere.

This is you at your ridiculous best. All Essendon players are known talents and Carlton players are hacks.

I'd think you're trolling, but what's scary is you actually believe this shit.

 

[Jade]

This is you at your ridiculous best. All Essendon players are known talents and Carlton players are hacks.

I'd think you're trolling, but what's scary is you actually believe this shit.

Now you're just cracking the sads, or not reading in context.

The inference was that Carlisle/Hooker/Hibberd came out of nowhere, as in, Essendon's improvement came because these previously unknown and completely unexpected players performed; and by extension that could happen at Carlton.

The reality is all three were EXPECTED to perform, they weren't unknown quantities ala Heppell in his first year.

The fact you say he's on Stanton's level sums up how crap your opinions are on Carlton players.

Hmmmm you're right. Based on 2013 I am being rather unfair to Stanton comparing him to Murphy.

 

[BlueJet]

Ha ha, my hatred for Carlton has a lot to do with the ENJOYMENT of it, but not the analysis itself.



Which to be fair, is a hope shared by seventeen other clubs. Nothing we've seen says Carlton are going to have a better strike rate at this.



Really have to strongly disagree with that. Carlisle, Hooker and Hibberd were pre-existing, KNOWN talents that simply needed time. Carlisle and Hooker were always touted as 200 game players - they aren't a bolt out of nowhere. And Hibberd would have STARTED 2013 in most Essendon fans top 5 or 10 players.

And as for Goddard; he was already an established elite player - not sure how that can be unforseen.

I didn't say that Carlton would have a better run of it, every side will have players take unexpected steps forward and others that drop away in any given year, it's you who seems to believe Carlton is suddenly going to drop off the map.
I didn't say Goddard was unforseen, he's been a solid to v good player for near on a decade, the other three were a little surprising. Carlisle always was going to be good, he just needed time but no one would've predicted he was going to be discussed as a possible all australian last season. Hooker really came as a shock, to go from being a solid depth player to one of the better intercept defenders in the comp & Hibberd to go from being a good solid player to one of your most important.

 

[BlueJet]

And this is where I genuinely believe that the Carlton faithful are genuinely suffering from a rose tinted belief not rooted in reality. Murphy, Thomas, Henderson etc is NOT a reasonable core to build around; and this is the fundamental difference in our opinions. I reckon I could write a similar list of players for every club, and for most that 'core' would be significantly better than Carlton. In relation to this poll, a list consisting of Heppell, Zaharakis, Carlisle, Daniher, Ryder, Bellchambers, Hurley, Hibberd, Hooker, Melksham, Myers...... it's diabolically skewed in Essendon's favour.

This thread in summation
Jade: Every Essendon player is young talented and on the improve whilst every Carlton player is old, past it and were lacking in ability to begin with.
Carlton supporters: Essendon are currently ahead of us but we are hopeful of progression from our younger guys.
Yep.. I'm not sure it's Carlton supporters with the rose tinted belief here mate.

 

[Jade]

I didn't say that Carlton would have a better run of it, every side will have players take unexpected steps forward and others that drop away in any given year, it's you who seems to believe Carlton is suddenly going to drop off the map.

Eh?

I think Carlton are, and will be this year a middle of the road side. I don't think relative performance is likely to be drastically different to 2013.

I didn't say Goddard was unforseen, he's been a solid to v good player for near on a decade, the other three were a little surprising. Carlisle always was going to be good, he just needed time but no one would've predicted he was going to be discussed as a possible all australian last season. Hooker really came as a shock, to go from being a solid depth player to one of the better intercept defenders in the comp & Hibberd to go from being a good solid player to one of your most important.

Hooker has never been a depth player; has been a first choice selection since 2009.

As for Hibberd, granted as an Essendon supporter I'm more 'exposed' to him, but if he came as a surprise I'd offer that you may not have been paying very close attention.

 

[BlueJet]

Eh?

I think Carlton are, and will be this year a middle of the road side. I don't think relative performance is likely to be drastically different to 2013.



Hooker has never been a depth player; has been a first choice selection since 2009.

As for Hibberd, granted as an Essendon supporter I'm more 'exposed' to him, but if he came as a surprise I'd offer that you may not have been paying very close attention.

Ok, well on previous form, Hooker would have ideally been depth, he took a huge step forward this past season. There's a reason almost everyone scoffed at Essendons proposal of Hooker for an unproven Caddy..
I'd also suggest that I'd have greater knowledge of Hibberd than most Essendon supporters.

 

[Ambrosia]

I didn't say that Carlton would have a better run of it, every side will have players take unexpected steps forward and others that drop away in any given year, it's you who seems to believe Carlton is suddenly going to drop off the map.
I didn't say Goddard was unforseen, he's been a solid to v good player for near on a decade, the other three were a little surprising. Carlisle always was going to be good, he just needed time but no one would've predicted he was going to be discussed as a possible all australian last season. Hooker really came as a shock, to go from being a solid depth player to one of the better intercept defenders in the comp & Hibberd to go from being a good solid player to one of your most important.

Only real surprise for me was Carlisle doing as well as he did as the number one defender. Hooker had put together patches of excellent games before but he would always ping a hammy and then not be quite right for the rest of the year and Hibberd started 2012 on fire but a bad hamstring injury derailed his season.

 

[Ambrosia]

Ok, well on previous form, Hooker would have ideally been depth, he took a huge step forward this past season. There's a reason almost everyone scoffed at Essendons proposal of Hooker for an unproven Caddy..

That's just not true. In the first half of 2012 Hooker took the oppositions best forward and only would have been beaten once or twice.

 

[BlueJet]

That's just not true. In the first half of 2012 Hooker took the oppositions best forward and only would have been beaten once or twice.

Speaking of just not true, that kind of form would have had him as a lock for All Australian, alas he wasn't.
I'm sure why Essendon supporters want to argue that their players improved. They went from being a middle of the road side to a top 4-6 side whilst remaining exactly the same apparently.

 

[Ambrosia]

Speaking of just not true, that kind of form would have had him as a lock for All Australian, alas he wasn't.
I'm sure why Essendon supporters want to argue that their players improved. They went from being a middle of the road side to a top 4-6 side whilst remaining exactly the same apparently.

I didn't say he didn't improve. I said his improvement was foreseeable

 

[BlueJet]

I didn't say he didn't improve. I said his improvement was foreseeable

Ok that's cool. My initial point before I got mixed up was that he has taken a huge step forward over the past 3-4 years and that I hope someone like Matthew Watson/Andrew McInnes can take a similar step forward, both are pretty raw at this stage but both have shown a bit when given game time.

 

[Monkey King]

Now you're just cracking the sads, or not reading in context.

The inference was that Carlisle/Hooker/Hibberd came out of nowhere, as in, Essendon's improvement came because these previously unknown and completely unexpected players performed; and by extension that could happen at Carlton.

No mate. You just don't see how you're coming off. There are a number of Carlton players who aren't unknown quantities either and who could quite rightly have a similar expectation of improvement. Whether it occurs or not is yet to known; but your take seems to be that only Essendon players have that kind of improvement in them. It's pretty ridiculous stuff tbh.

Hmmmm you're right. Based on 2013 I am being rather unfair to Stanton comparing him to Murphy.

Ah! If only a footy career was one year long, Adrian McAdam would have been a legend. Move to a broader perspective, which is where you get a clearer picture, and Murphy, an All Australian and AFCA winner, is really a level above. Even last year Stanton wasn't all that far ahead. Murphy won more clearances, centre clearances, stoppages, kicked more goals etc and averaged just a couple of effective disposals fewer than Stanton. Your rating of Carlton players is simply atrocious and you seem happy to adopt whichever myopic viewpoint might sustain your bizarre opinions ... and even then they're skewed.

 

[Ambrosia]

Ok that's cool. My initial point before I got mixed up was that he has taken a huge step forward over the past 3-4 years and that I hope someone like Matthew Watson/Andrew McInnes can take a similar step forward, both are pretty raw at this stage but both have shown a bit when given game time.

Yeah I agree their are definitely Carlton players who have foreseeable improvement this year I think the criticism of their list is their are too many players are with a foreseeable decline.

With Judd slowing down I have question marks over a midfield lead by Murphy, Thomas, Gibbs and Mclean who are all excellent on their day but I'm not sure how Murphy and Thomas will handle the attention that goes with being the top midfielders in a side.

 

[Monkey King]

Yeah I agree their are definitely Carlton players who have foreseeable improvement this year I think the criticism of their list is their are too many players are with a foreseeable decline.

I think it's overstated tbh. All we're ever told is how Waite is never on the park ... yet we're apparently going to be stuffed when he retires. That Judd is baked, but again, we're stuffed when he retires too. Carrazzo had next to no impact last season, but it seems we can't improve because he's just turned 30. Our most consistent aging contributor is Simpson, who happens to be one of the league's most durable and is getting better with age, but we're done for there too apparently. Meanwhile players integral to your performances last year in Watson & Goddard, your top two in the B&F count, are turning 29yo this year and not even considered.

 

[Big_Luch]

When guys like Melksham and Myers are considered 'a good core to build around' and guys like Murphy/Henderson/Thomas/yarran/gibbs/garlett/gibbs are not considered a good core, then im not sure what is.

Talk about rose colored glasses....

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Deleted

 

[Ambrosia]

I think it's overstated tbh. All we're ever told is how Waite is never on the park ... yet we're apparently going to be stuffed when he retires. That Judd is baked, but again, we're stuffed when he retires too. Carrazzo had next to no impact last season, but it seems we can't improve because he's just turned 30. Our most consistent aging contributor is Simpson, who happens to be one of the league's most durable and is getting better with age, but we're done for there too apparently. Meanwhile players integral to your performances last year in Watson & Goddard, your top two in the B&F count, are turning 29yo this year and not even considered.

I agree Carlton's ageing list is overstated however it has a lot to do with people not rating the players coming through the ranks who are set to replace Judd, Waite and Carrazzo.

Lucky for Carlton what the majority of people think is only useful for winning polls on bigfooty not football matches.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

Lucky for Carlton what the majority of people think is only useful for winning polls on bigfooty not football matches.

are sure you barrack for the bombers ? way to sensible quote

 

[BlueJet]

Yeah I agree their are definitely Carlton players who have foreseeable improvement this year I think the criticism of their list is their are too many players are with a foreseeable decline.

With Judd slowing down I have question marks over a midfield lead by Murphy, Thomas, Gibbs and Mclean who are all excellent on their day but I'm not sure how Murphy and Thomas will handle the attention that goes with being the top midfielders in a side.

That's fair enough, I suppose we'll have to wait and see on that front.

 

[BlueJet]

are sure you barrack for the bombers ? way to sensible quote

Credit to him, he's a good balanced poster.