News Carlton - the 5th youngest side in the AFL

[Jeremias]

...anyway... why the hell did this thread go straight towards Essendon? For the first time in over a decade you've got genuine reason to think about the pointy end, and you're worrying about a side who finished 8th.

Since when does discussion equate to 'being worried'?

Believe me, we're not worried. Not in the slightest.

 

[HARKER]

Only three of our 26+ers (the oldest 9) are all that hard to replace - Fletch, Winderlich & Watson.

McVeigh, Davey & Hille will play games next year, but have replacements (Hibberd, De'll'Ol'io and Bellchambers respectively) in the wings, Dyson/Slatts/NLM aren't best 22 at the moment nor were they last year.

Certainly wouldn't claim the list's in great shape, but far from the worst. The bulk of the older guys are eminently replaceable, the bulk of the younger guys are doing pretty well.

Winderlich and Watson have plenty left in the tank just yet, but as you say, you need plenty going right for your list to be ultimately competitive.

Geelong held up very well without Ablett, but it may be somewhat doubtful that they'll be able to easily replace several AA's over the course of the next couple of years.
Having said that, they're planning has been sound, giving them 3 picks in the top 50 last year, 3 the year before and 4 in 2009, scoring themselves some great talent throughout.
This competition is designed though to allow clubs to ebb and flow, but it's really the ones that reach their peak with all factors in place from a list perspective, that will challenge for the ultimate prize.

 

[BlueBanger]

No worry Slatts.

We're just delighted to see a bandwagon made from matchsticks being pulled down a corrugated track by a couple of mules who are too busy sniffing each other (and themselves) to see the cliff on the horizon.

 

[lamaros]

I hear you, but Hille is still your best ruck-man and McVeigh is still one of the first picked.
Every time you lose quality, you really want to be able to scale up by replacing it with better quality.
Of course that won't always happen all the time, but the value of the mix must be getting better or else you fall behind.

Sure, but our older guys are:

Fletcher - Impossible to replace.
Hille - Third best ruckman (Ryder is far better, as is Bellchambers), getting games from his overall game around the ground, which Ballchambers can't match yet.
McVeigh - Rapidly falling behind guys like Hibberd, nowhere near one of the first picked.

Your older guys are Scotland, Judd, Waite, Thornton, Carrazzo, Simpson, Duigan. A few of those will be pretty darn hard to replace too. All are older than Winderlich and Watson.

Really, Fletcher is the big question mark we have about our list at the moment. We need Carlisle to step up and Hooker and Pears to get fit otherwise we will really miss him.

 

[Slattery_20]

Since when does discussion equate to 'being worried'?

Believe me, we're not worried. Not in the slightest.

Figure of speech.
"Bothering to discuss".

Clearly we're not all that close to the pointy end, not yet.

Winderlich and Watson have plenty left in the tank just yet, but as you say, you need plenty going right for your list to be ultimately competitive.

Well that's true, but no more or less true of us than any of the 18 clubs, just to a greater/lesser extent!
What happens if Carlton or Collingwood or Geelong lose 3 of their best players for a month, in the middle of the year, like we did... I'd suggest they'd also go off the rails a bit.

We need at least 2-3 of the younger midfielders - Zaha, Howlett, Melksham, Heppell, and now Kavanagh - to really step up. They've shown reasonable enough signs but they're just not ready yet, simple as that, and the older - but not as talented - guys (NLM, Lonergan, McVeigh Hille etc) are more or less place holders until that happens. Wait and see.

 

[HARKER]

Well that's true, but no more or less true of us than any of the 18 clubs, just to a greater/lesser extent!
What happens if Carlton lose 3 of their best players for a month, in the middle of the year, like we did... I'd suggest they'd also go off the rails a bit.

I can tell you exactly what happens: We miss out reaching the Preliminary Final.

 

[Slattery_20]

Has anyone else gone full nerd and actually crunched the numbers?

I got a different result to RoCo - Essendon averaging 23 years 183 days, Carlton 23 years 70 days - 113 days difference, compared to the 255 days difference he's got. Going off footywire.

Calling Ron the Bear...

 

[Azzurro]

What happens if Carlton or Collingwood or Geelong lose 3 of their best players for a month, in the middle of the year, like we did... I'd suggest they'd also go off the rails a bit.

i can tell you exactly what happens: We miss out reaching the preliminary final.

qft

 

[Silvagnis]

I can tell you exactly what happens: We miss out reaching the Preliminary Final.

Apparently we didn't have any injury problems last year. No upside with Henderson, Jamison, Kreuzer, Hampson, Waite, Lucas and Laidler fit for every round. Hammer only played with a broken finger before he injured his knee whilst playing his best game.

Warnock beat Ryder and Hille before he had both shoulders operated on.

Bombers might need to book Ryder in for a heart specialist if they want to progress.

Your older guys are Scotland, Judd, Waite, Thornton, Carrazzo, Simpson, Duigan. A few of those will be pretty darn hard to replace too. All are older than Winderlich and Watson.

Simpson was selected in the same draft as Watson.

Why will Kade "go off the rails" earlier than Jobe?

Duigan's played one year, so I guess we need to start looking for a replacement for both.



The Blues might need to move on our 2010 draft picks who couldn't possibly be as good as Hooker, Pears and Carlisle.

Judd's a one in a million player, but as far as I know, Carlton will have access to the draft and trades after this year.

 

[lamaros]

Simpson was selected in the same draft as Watson.

So what? Watson is still a year younger.

Why will Kade "go off the rails" earlier than Jobe?

History shows that players get worse towards the end of their careers. Also; better players usually play for longer.

Duigan's played one year, so I guess we need to start looking for a replacement for both.

You'll certainly have to start looking for a replacement for him in around three and a half years - he'll be 31 then.

The Blues might need to move on our 2010 draft picks who couldn't possibly be as good as Hooker, Pears and Carlisle.

Yeah, because backing guys who've played 49 and 47 games against untested guys is stupid, right?

You do realise that every list in the competition has flaws, right? If you guys were flawless you'd have won the premiership last year.

 

[parrot]

..... why the hell did this thread go straight towards Essendon? For the first time in over a decade you've got genuine reason to think about the pointy end, and you're worrying about a side who finished 8th.

The reason for the amusement (and I guess "worry" from an Essendon supporter's perspective) is that Essendon have got that fatal combo of having an average list that's also very old. It's a very Richmondesque 2008 situation, and we know how that ended. Badly. To be fair, Hird inherited a lot of the problems. But WHY keep battlers like McVeigh and Slattery on your list, instead of adding new talent who might have a future? The reason is there's huge pressure on Hird to make sure Essendon is "competitive" and "thereabouts" in 2012, even if it compromises their long term future. What Essendon really needed to do was to clear out all the dead-wood, even if that meant a big slide in 2012. You'd then get game time into the younger players, and some badly needed high draft picks to try to sort out that terrible midfield. Finishing mid-range again with the same old, average list is just putting off the inevitable.

 

[Tanks_Alot]

Sure, but our older guys are:

Fletcher - Impossible to replace.
Hille - Third best ruckman (Ryder is far better, as is Bellchambers), getting games from his overall game around the ground, which Ballchambers can't match yet.
McVeigh - Rapidly falling behind guys like Hibberd, nowhere near one of the first picked.

Your older guys are Scotland, Judd, Waite, Thornton, Carrazzo, Simpson, Duigan. A few of those will be pretty darn hard to replace too. All are older than Winderlich and Watson.

Really, Fletcher is the big question mark we have about our list at the moment. We need Carlisle to step up and Hooker and Pears to get fit otherwise we will really miss him.

Yeah we'll obviously have to replace them one day, but the big difference between us is we're top 4 material and should be pushing for a premiership for the next few years whereas you guys will most likely drop further down the ladder because once Fletcher goes if you don't keep Pears on the park, you can't rely on Hooker and your defence will be quite poor against the big forwards.

Your next option will be to put Hurley there, but then with Hille gone too, your forward line will be drastically lacking a decent quality KPF.

Gumby just can't buy any luck at all so we can probably forget about him, he hasn't had the games under his belt despite being in the system since 2007 so even if he does play and manage to stay injury free it'll probably take him a couple of years to develop.

 

[Malifice]

Yeah we'll obviously have to replace them one day, but the big difference between us is we're top 4 material and should be pushing for a premiership for the next few years whereas you guys will most likely drop further down the ladder because once Fletcher goes if you don't keep Pears on the park, you can't rely on Hooker and your defence will be quite poor against the big forwards.

Your next option will be to put Hurley there, but then with Hille gone too, your forward line will be drastically lacking a decent quality KPF.

Gumby just can't buy any luck at all so we can probably forget about him, he hasn't had the games under his belt despite being in the system since 2007 so even if he does play and manage to stay injury free it'll probably take him a couple of years to develop.

Without turning this into an Essendon bashing thread, I just cant see them improving much with the current list.

Defensively they have problems with Fletcher not being able to last forever. Hes 36 and still thier best defender. Offensively I dont see much going on either (Hille is over the Hill (boom boom), Gumbys problems are well documented, Reimers is all talk and no action, Monfries looks a better player in the middle). Ryder is still hit and miss.

They need to clone Hurley.

They have no specialised monster ruckman, a young midfield that doesnt quite stand out, and still far too many outside type players.

Watson is criminally underrated. Probably the only Elite player in thier 22.

Everyone bangs on about the Bombers midfield weakness, but thats actually where I have hope for them with some OK looking younger blokes in there.

Really think Hird is going to have a rough ride and have to make some tough decsions this year (and at the end of the year).

Lose Hurley, and theyre screwed.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Back on topic...

That chart is absolute bullshit. A more accurate display of average age of players that actually play would have been to rank the teams by 100 game players.

Bizarre, that!

 

[Malifice]

Back on topic...

That chart is absolute bullshit. A more accurate display of average age of players that actually play would have been to rank the teams by 100 game players.

Bizarre, that!

The charts got that. It just doesnt rank them in that order.

Most top 8 sides from last year have 10+ 100 gamers.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

The charts got that. It just doesnt rank them in that order.

Most top 8 sides from last year have 10+ 100 gamers.

That's what I'm saying. Collingwood (ranked 11th here) was easily in the 4 oldest 22s of last year (better reflected by their 100-gamers stat)

Geelong, similarly would have been better represented by using the 100-gamer stat, moving from 6th to 3rd.

Essendon plays a marginally younger (yet IIRC more experienced) 22 than us.

 

[lamaros]

That's what I'm saying. Collingwood (ranked 11th here) was easily in the 4 oldest 22s of last year (better reflected by their 100-gamers stat)

Geelong, similarly would have been better represented by using the 100-gamer stat, moving from 6th to 3rd.

Essendon plays a marginally younger (yet IIRC more experienced) 22 than us.

Aye, we have a younger 22. In 2011 the only times we didn't have the youngest team of the two teams playing was against Melb, GC and Rich.

Won't derail the thread more about the dons, but suffice to say expecting us to drop out of the eight based on age would be foolish.

Youngest lists in the 2011 eight, judged by age of those players whove actually played a few games for their team, are Ess, Carl, WC and Coll. Hawks are a touch older, followed by Sydney, while Geelong and St. Kilda are a fair bit older.

 

[Monkey King]

Has anyone else gone full nerd and actually crunched the numbers?

Someone put this up in your thread on the topic ...

Champion Data

Crows 23yrs 135d
55.9games

Lions 23y 201d
59.1g

Blues 23y 321d
66.6g

Pies 23y 266d
73.7g

Bombers 23y 303d
65.6g

Dockers 24y 292d
60.9g

Cats 24y 113d
72.9g

Suns 21y 299d
33.2g

Gayants 21y 84d
21.5g

Hawks 24y 99d
76.8g

Dees 23y 77d
54.6g

Roos 23y 197d
53.4g

Port 23y 183d
58.5g

Tigers 23y 22d
48.7g

Saints 24y 277d
83.3g

Swans 24 233d
75.4g

Eagles 23y 307d
66.4g

Dogs 24y 0d
64.2g

 

[Blue and Silver]

History shows that players get worse towards the end of their careers. Also; better players usually play for longer.
.

History also shows that thinner guys tend to last longer because they carry less weight on their joints and muscles and are less inclined to injuries. Kade has played the most successive games for Carlton. I reckon he'll be around longer than Watson, who already has injury worries

 

[Silvagnis]

History also shows that thinner guys tend to last longer because they carry less weight on their joints and muscles and are less inclined to injuries. Kade has played the most successive games for Carlton. I reckon he'll be around longer than Watson, who already has injury worries

Feel the same way. Skinny mids such as Bradley, Tuck, Flower, etc. have gone on for ages. Yarran could put on more weight in his late twenties like Pickett and not last as long.

 

[Slattery_20]

Someone put this up in your thread on the topic ...

Oh great... 3 different sources, 3 conflicting stories... clear as mud!

 

[Claypigeon]

Oh great... 3 different sources, 3 conflicting stories... clear as mud!

Well I just crunched the numbers using The Footywire's data and come up with the following. .. If anyone wants to refute the DOB data on Footywire, please do so, otherwise this is accurate as at Jan 1, 2012.

With Rookies (click to enlarge)



Wthout Rookies (Click to enlarge)

 

[Claypigeon]

Interesting thing to note is that Carlton has the 2nd smallest Average Deviation of age at 2yrs and 105days. .. Which means we have a lot of guys packed into a similar age grouping around our average. ..

Anyone with better statistics knowledge have some further analysis? or want me to add a calculation?

Edit: I think the second figures (without Rookies) is a better indicator. .. Thinking of doing the stats on the top 25 most experienced players. ..

 

[HARKER]

Interesting thing to note is that Carlton has the 2nd smallest Average Deviation of age at 2yrs and 105days. .. Which means we have a lot of guys packed into a similar age grouping around our average. ..

Anyone with better statistics knowledge have some further analysis? or want me to add a calculation?

Edit: I think the second figures (without Rookies) is a better indicator. .. Thinking of doing the stats on the top 25 most experienced players. ..

Great work CP.

A good snapshot, but there are so many variables involved for any set of numbers to really make any sense as to a teams standing.
Where I see Carlton having an advantage over many teams is that we don't really stand to lose quality players in the next three years, whilst bolstering the bottom end of the list.

We only really lost Houlihan last year and even Scotland isn't a certain retiree, come years end.
The rest will be forced decisions in letting players go.

 

[Kreuzin4aBluesin]

Interesting thing to note is that Carlton has the 2nd smallest Average Deviation of age at 2yrs and 105days. .. Which means we have a lot of guys packed into a similar age grouping around our average. ..

Anyone with better statistics knowledge have some further analysis? or want me to add a calculation?

Edit: I think the second figures (without Rookies) is a better indicator. .. Thinking of doing the stats on the top 25 most experienced players. ..

Super work. Love that you've got the time and inclination to do this CP. Top 25 most experienced players would be interesting. Also, any analytical manoeuvrings you can do to highlight why 2012 will be the beginning of a dominant era for the cfc would be delightful