2000 possibly the worst draft to have 3 picks in the top 15 
Club History Carlton at the Draft 1981 - 2014
- Thread starter The_Wookie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Could we include all the upcoming potential Father/Son selections as well?
Joking
*Ducks for cover...*
- Aug 24, 2009
- 1,443
- 5,156
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Thanks Wookie - tells an interesting tale, particularly post-2001.
Really highlights the poor returns from our 2nd-4th round picks in the national draft.
Putting aside the 2013 national draft, there are only 12 players currently on our list from the previous 12 national drafts (and this includes 3 number one picks). Seems like a poor ratio to me, and explains our lack of good depth in recent years. Need to turn this around if we're to build genuine depth and become a threat. Hope we've turned the corner.
Really highlights the poor returns from our 2nd-4th round picks in the national draft.
Putting aside the 2013 national draft, there are only 12 players currently on our list from the previous 12 national drafts (and this includes 3 number one picks). Seems like a poor ratio to me, and explains our lack of good depth in recent years. Need to turn this around if we're to build genuine depth and become a threat. Hope we've turned the corner.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #29
Chart now has players who reached at least 50 games highlighted in yellow. Some other corrections made.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #30
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #33
Honestly its all ive been thinking about since i did it
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #34
The_Wookie, you should remove the Loats/Beaumont trade. Loats went to Geelong, Beaumont to Hawthorn and Clarke to Carlton. So in effect it's just In: Clarke (Geel) Out: Beaumont (Haw)
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #35
got some grief over talkingcarlton for it lol
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #36
Well you will play in the street.
ferrisb
Brownlow Medallist
A hard earned post needs a big cold beer.....
He was a free agent we did not match Crows offer to him and let him go for nothing.
We then paid Dale Thomas about 200K more than Betts wanted in same free agency period.
We got no compensation at all for letting Waite and Betts go in last two off seasons.
We are good at this....
Jeremias
Moderator
- Sep 26, 2004
- 46,219
- 62,622
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Moderator
- #39
You're committing the cardinal sin of listening to the media with regards to contracts, but I'll play along regardless.
We had the money to bring Daisy across AND keep Betts, yet one came and the other left. That should tell you it wasn't as simple as one or the other.
If you're comparing the two at the figures you're quoting - potentially elite forward pocket @ $X, or potentially elite midfield/half forward @ X+200k - it's a no-brainer and the club clearly made the correct decision.
That's not correct. We effectively received Dale Thomas as compensation for Betts. We brought Daisy across rather than take the draft pick which would have been forthcoming.
Clubs aren't told what compensation they are to receive for losing a free agent until the player is gone. We thought we may receive something for Waite yet disappointingly that wasn't the case so we move on and deal with what we've got.
Are you suggesting we should have compromised our list management strategy to appease a selfish footballer because we may not receive any compensation for his departure?
That would be completely irresponsible and one of the worst paths the club could possibly take.
You're blaming the club for things largely out of their control. I don't mind people having a go at the club if it's deserved, but at least make it fair.
Yes, we are. The team we've got currently in charge of list management has hardly made a mistake since they've been at the helm.
Revisionist and hindsight garbage is exactly that.
The spreadsheet was corrected a long while ago...
I'd like to know exactly how the club can be held responsible for players leaving as a free agent. Clearly, the player wants to either go to a new club or location, or they want more money.
Would you rather overpay both Waite and Betts? Weren't you saying in the 2014 List thread that we kept players on too long before trading them out in the early 2000s? How is keeping them on and paying even more just for the privilege of keeping them any better than what you were talking about? It's worse!
We don't get to choose the compensation at all. So that is a moot point too.
It seems to me like you are finding reasons to be negative about the club where they don't really exist.
- May 29, 2009
- 29,795
- 14,718
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- LA Lakers
It does if you are reading into it that way.
I'm not finding reasons. I'm a peeved off as a Carlton fan, sick to death of us showing no significant sign of getting a real handle on list management that is so important.
As for Waite. I actually agree in principal with the idea that offering him a one year contract was the way to go. However, it was borderline for mine. He had in past 4 or 5 years had various issues with body that had him miss many games. We could not overly commit on him playing full seasons. However at same time you just cannot count him out as being able to play a full two seasons. How he could have helped Henderson and Casboult was the clincher for me. Him staying another two years had a bit of upside for mine. I probably would have offered him a two year deal when push come to shove if I sense he could really go for nothing and play two really good seasons of footy.
If anyone seriously thinks Jones best is as good as Waite they are kidding themselves. We lost a good one there that could have taken a lot of heat off Hendo and Casboult for a couple more seasons whilst Casboult developed to full maturity as a big guy.
Last edited:
We got nothing directly back for Betts. End of story. We lost an elite small forward. Either best or second best in league at that role.
Dale Thomas was an incoming player.
Yes, because we got Dale Thomas via free agency meant we were disallowed to get anything for Betts. Thomas is no compensation if he cost a lot more and maybe in future causes us to lose another player via salary cap squeeze.
In essence it meant we gave up Betts in order to pay Thomas a lot more. Have a look at their seasons we just had. Hard to argue Thomas is worth more than Betts. Certainly not a couple of hundred thousand more. Don't get me wrong, which you jumped down my throat by tone of your post, but I hope like hell Thomas gets over his injuries and plays like a genuine mid for next 5 or 6 seasons but the jury is still out for long term on that.
My whole point is so far we don't seem to adjust to new systems of list management well. Our results speak for themselves.
I hope it changes.
I wish Betts well and Waite. Both great club servants through a tough time over many seasons. I just wish when we do have good players we value them properly so when we do decide to part with players we do so in a way that gets us something back for future to either replace that player resource in present or gives us some source of having access to early picks or youngsters on the up. None of that has happened in both those instances. I only hope Thomas works out and encouraged by his worth ethic he showed.
Waite's 59 years old and he held a gun to the clubs head for an extra year, what we offered was good enough and he went, so be it.
Picked up Jaksch, and he's a 10 year player, Jones is s**t or bust, but hell no KP forward is gunna bust out and kick 100 goals in the near future. Both under 24, couple of years in the system, will take that every day of the week.
Our recruiting has improved over the moon since MM appeared.
should write for neighbours with that type of fiction
some sense found
Something tells me you have been working on Neighbours' scripts for years.should write for neighbours with that type of fiction
Dramoth
Premium Platinum
The club just used to trade away our first and/or second round picks for established players just so we could keep the ride going a year or two longer...
Jabba73
Hall of Famer
Very happy we seem to have decided this strategy wasn't working.
Similar threads
- Locked
