The Big Issue - Has the club misread the football climate again?

[No1Suspect]

I think the club had no choice to do what has been done since Bolton came on board.

The sad reality of it is we have very few players in their prime years who are any good. Our 25-29 year old range is practically non existent.

Yes we traded players like Thouhy and Henderson from this bracket. Amongst others. But in reality they are B grade players at best.

The club had a list full of holes from YEARS of putrid list management and recruitment. Just some that come to mind.
- Pick 7 for Boekhurst, Whiley and KJ
-Pick 11 for Brock McClean
-Pick 12 Kane Lucas
-Pick 22 Bootsma
-Pick 18 Matthew Watson
-2nd round pick and other picks for Robbie Warnock.

The modern game is simply about drafting and talent development. Adelaide and Port Adelaide are a good examples of it. You hit your picks or get lucky with Father son talent and you can build a premium list. Carlton frankly butchered the draft for years. We had more success with rookie picks than our early draft selections.....

Now we add in the players we lost to off field issues and go home factor which show exactly what a rabble we were behind closed doors. Fev, Robinson, Garlett, Bell, Sam Jacobs and although most aren't A graders they would all get a run on our list over the last 5-10 year period. (Fev a bit older granted).

Really the position of our list was so bad the only option was to salvage what we could. Get as many picks as we could and hope SOS found players.

Now I still believe SOS with picks like Willo and Garlett has shown we can find some dimonds in the rough. If the early picks come on as expected we should be ok

The draft pick summation is spot on, we cant ignore the dire situation the hughes rogers regime has left us in. Yes we got something for Yarran and Henderson but my god there were some misses, we are coming from a long long way back our 24-27 yr old talent depth is shocking.

 

[gbatman]

Hardwick took 7 years to get Richmond to the top. He was questioned for most of those 7 years.

Like us, Hardwick came in off the back of years of terrible drafting and trading. Hence the long time frame.

Richmond stuck with Hardwick despite criticism from fans and media.

Richmond are now the reigning premiers and have a fantastic list. They have done an excellent job.

We are in our 3rd year. Bolton and Silvagni will have to replace nearly every player on our list to get us to premiership standard due to the age, quality and time frame.

Our build is no different to Richmonds or many other successful sides. We have acquired players from the draft and from trades. We are yet to acquire players from free agency, probably because we aren't strong enough to be a destination club and because those players haven't quite been on our age range.

Give our current administration 7 years and we will get this right. We have that much to get right it's going to take all of that barring a miracle.

A lot of the talented players we got rid of was to open the salary cap, because they had terrible attitudes, wouldn't run both ways and wouldn't apply pressure or they wanted to go.

You either keep the talented lazy types or you change the culture and get rid of them.

 

[Gethelred]

Well, this was fun.

Reasonableness seems to be the order of the day.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

Good discussion point, but guys like Betts and Garlett went on Micks watch.

Andrew McKay's watch

 

[Stig O'Hara]

No doubt.

A generation utterly wasted.

Egos, incompetence....

 

[La Dispute]

What makes you think Mitchell wanted to come and likely rot away at the Blues?

I'm talking more about the debate itself rather than like likelihood of Mitchell joining, which was never going to happen.

In hindsight he looks comfortably worth a top 5 pick.

 

[PP34]

No doubt.

A generation utterly wasted.

Egos, incompetence....

Wasted by what happened over a decade ago.

The current team in charge has not misread anything at this stage.

 

[BLUEALLTHRU]

Wasted by what happened over a decade ago.

The current team in charge has not misread anything at this stage.

Bolton has the Wheel and the coarse is set.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

The Hawks are rebuilding make no mistake about it, im more so trying to get across that theres nothing wrong with trading top picks as long as you get top players. By top players i mean guys who will play 6-10 seasons with us. The Hawks identified Mitchell and Omeara as players that would suit there structure and style and went and got them. IMO underpaying for Mitchell and slightly overpaying for Jaegar.

We have a good draft hand this year so if the club saw necessary to go after a Wines type i would have no issue offering a top 10 pick and more for him.

They picked up Tom and Jaeger at the end of 2016, a year they finished 3rd. They might have slid to 12th in 2017 but Birchall played 5 games, Frawley played 8, Jaeger played 6, Poppy 15, Rioli 7, Schoenmakers 11 and Roughy back from cancer after a year off. That’s not rebuilding.

 

[mediumsizered]

No doubt.

A generation utterly wasted.

Egos, incompetence....

You talking about BF or the Carlton Football Club?

 

[Metalcrusher]

You talking about BF or the Carlton Football Club?

I think ... (god only knows what really goes on in numbers head), that he means, we (CFC) have wasted a full generation (perhaps 2) of fan based loyalty tied to CFC. We have essentially become an irrelevant club and have been adrift to the tune of twenty years of borderline neglect and mal practice.

How do you expect Little Johnny who is say 6 years old, and everyone is talking about footy at school, not bow to peer pressure and go with the majority of his mates (teams they follow) because of their perceive strength/results? Even though the parents may support CFC?

What will be interesting is when our die hard supporters drift off (baby boomers, they were bought into their prime when CFC was a powerhouse), what will be our demographic and membership numbers?

They say Carlton fans are notoriously fickle ..... only come on board WHEN we are successful? I put it too you this is the behavioural traits the club has displayed from probably the mid seventies to mid nineties .... so why expect their core fan base to be any different.

Birds of a feather ....

They are and we (older demographic fans) are, merely a representation of the clubs ethos at the time.

It would be interesting to conduct a poll on here to see where our age demographic sits.

See how many "supporters/members" we have in the post 1995-now age bracket. I would suspect it would be the lower end of the bell curve.

My gut feel is most CFC members are 40-45+

 

[Macca43]

I think ... (god only knows what really goes on in numbers head), that he means, we (CFC) have wasted a full generation (perhaps 2) of fan based loyalty tied to CFC. We have essentially become an irrelevant club and have been adrift to the tune of twenty years of borderline neglect and mal practice.

How do you expect Little Johnny who is say 6 years old, and everyone is talking about footy at school, not bow to peer pressure and go with the majority of his mates (teams they follow) because of their perceive strength/results? Even though the parents may support CFC?

What will be interesting is when our die hard supporters drift off (baby boomers, they were bought into their prime when CFC was a powerhouse), what will be our demographic and membership numbers?

They say Carlton fans are notoriously fickle ..... only come on board WHEN we are successful? I put it too you this is the behavioural traits the club has displayed from probably the mid seventies to mid nineties .... so why expect their core fan base to be any different.

Birds of a feather ....

They are and we (older demographic fans) are, merely a representation of the clubs ethos at the time.

It would be interesting to conduct a poll on here to see where our age demographic sits.

See how many "supporters/members" we have in the post 1995-now age bracket. I would suspect it would be the lower end of the bell curve.

My gut feel is most CFC members are 40-45+

If a parent isn't strong enough to keep their child supporting the blues they should be reported to child services!!

My Grandparents barracked for the blues, my parents barracked for the blues, my siblings barracked for the blues and my children and nieces and nephews barrack for the blues - it isn't that hard.

 

[Brighton_Diggins]

ON the face of it, Bolts is the first coach I've trusted since the Glory days.
Pagan, Ratten, Micky? I never felt they were the ones. I was hoping, but my gut feel didn't let me down.
I think Bolts understands the current climate very well. SOS also.

 

[El Topo]

The thread's question seems to imply that the club had a choice. Looking at the list in 2015 our young hopes included Buckley, Menzel, Graham, and our senior core were all flakes and C graders apart from Murph/Gibbs/Krooz/Simpson. The place was already burned down to the foundations so ground up was the only option.

 

[bluey44]

The thread's question seems to imply that the club had a choice. Looking at the list in 2015 our young hopes included Buckley, Menzel, Graham, and our senior core were all flakes and C graders apart from Murph/Gibbs/Krooz/Simpson. The place was already burned down to the foundations so ground up was the only option.

Wow... now that you mention... in hindsight looking at the 2015 list, it was pretty barren !!
http://www.blueseum.org/2015+Playing+List

Of course we had Cripps... and at that stage we were still hopeful of retaining Hendo, and hoping Casboult would take the 'next step' ...
But a lot of the rest of them didn't end up amounting to much ...

 

[gbatman]

Yep, you look at 2015 list and where that team finished and the problems it had, regardless of quality, Ratten's and Malthouse's Carlton had cultural and work rate problems as much as it had quality problems.

Often when a team starts a rebuild, there are a good number of quality players that are carried through from the start to the finished product.

For us, maybe one player will be carried through, Cripps. Simpson, Kreuzer and Murphy may run out of time. This is a big problem, the size of the task and the subsequent time frame that creates.

As much as I hate to sat it, this is at least what the idea of the priority pick was supposed to help with. Clubs that had massive rebuilds ahead of them and shortening this time frame because lets face it, long rebuilds can be fairly unsuccessful. Mostly because good players get sick of it and want out. Good players leaving other clubs don't want to come.

There was a time we could have got ahead with priority picks. We've done a good job getting ahead slightly with good trades. We need free agency to accelerate things.

The AFL's system works, but it does help top sides stay up the top and really weak sides rise very very slowly.

 

[Bluebag13]

Yep, you look at 2015 list and where that team finished and the problems it had, regardless of quality, Ratten's and Malthouse's Carlton had cultural and work rate problems as much as it had quality problems.

Often when a team starts a rebuild, there are a good number of quality players that are carried through from the start to the finished product.

For us, maybe one player will be carried through, Cripps. Simpson, Kreuzer and Murphy may run out of time. This is a big problem, the size of the task and the subsequent time frame that creates.

As much as I hate to sat it, this is at least what the idea of the priority pick was supposed to help with. Clubs that had massive rebuilds ahead of them and shortening this time frame because lets face it, long rebuilds can be fairly unsuccessful. Mostly because good players get sick of it and want out. Good players leaving other clubs don't want to come.

There was a time we could have got ahead with priority picks. We've done a good job getting ahead slightly with good trades. We need free agency to accelerate things.

The AFL's system works, but it does help top sides stay up the top and really weak sides rise very very slowly.

Our demise along with a number of other teams came at a really bad point in time.
Not only did the AFL bring in a couple of new teams and with that the drafts were heavily favoured towards them (understandable to an extent) but the introduction of FA was always going to favour the top teams in the short term.

In 5 years time when the AFL has acclimatised to the new way of player movement a team you wont see the likes of top teams staying ahead for 10+ years like we are seeing with Geelong, Sydney and Hawthorn.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[btdg]

So, was musing over this today, and my mind got ticking. What was the 'Road not travelled'? (Sorry for the long post)

We looked at our 2015 list and went: "This list is garbage. We need to rebuild. Clear the decks, lets hit the draft". The premise of this thread is that we misread the football climate, that the smart teams (read Geelong and Hawthorn) have chosen to rebuild via trades for established players. So what if, instead, we said "We have a solid core but not enough young players entering their primes. Let's target players and trade for them". What would our team look like if we had pursued an ultra-agressive trade strategy, getting rid of early draft picks for established available players?

To keep it simple, here are the rules. I'm looking at the BEST POSSIBLE scenario:
- Each year, I've picked the best player who moved clubs to a Melbourne (not Geelong) team. I've used our 'natural' draft picks to beat the offer in the simplest way possible
- I've removed the trades that added draft picks, except Henderson (who had walked out and wasn't coming back) and Bell.
- Where it seems reasonable to do so, I've kept our picks the same. EG: in this model we have pick 14 in 2015 instead of 12 - its reasonable enough to assume that Charlie Curnow still ends up available.
- I've assumed the same delistings occur, players develop the same - all else is equal.
- I've assumed any late picks (beyond about 50) are the same, and we get them one way or another. Same with the 'cheapies'.
- I've given us one cheapish free agent each year - if we already took one, kept the same.
- I excluded us trading for Tom Mitchell/O'Meara because that was a package deal that Hawthorn had sewn up. Could repeat with us stealing their strategy but it becomes very complicated from there...

So how does it pan out:

2015:
Trades that didn't happen: Yarran, Menzel, Kerridge to us,
Trade that does happen: Trade pick 1 and pick 19 for Jake Carlisle and pick 14
Other trades that still happen: Plowman, Phillips, Sumner, Lamb, (third and fourth round picks instead of pick 28)
Draft picks that still happen: McKay (8), Curnow (14), Cuningham (26), SOS (late F/S)
Free Agent signing: Matthew Wright

2016:
Trades that don't happen: Touhy, Marchbank, Pickett, Palmer,
Trade that doesn't happen: Dion Prestia for a first round pick (for simplicity no swap of second rounders)
Draft: Fisher (27), Polson, Williamson, Kerr
Free agent: Josh Green

2017:
Trades that don't happen: Gibbs,
Trade that does: Jake Lever to Carlton for our first and our 2018 first picks.
Still trade: Kennedy to Carlton for second-round pick
Draft: Tom De Koning, Jarrod Garlett,
Free Agent: Aaron Mullet

Net Effect:
Ins (compared to current list): Jake Carlisle, Dion Prestia, Zach Touhy, Josh Green, Jake Lever, Bryce Gibbs,
Outs (compared to current list): Jacob Weitering, Sam Kerridge, Caleb Marchbank, Jarrod Pickett, Sam Petrevski-Seton, Harrison Macreadie, Paddy Dow, Lochie O'Brien as well as our 2018 first round pick

Best 22 using an aggressive trade model:
B: Plowman, Carlisle, Touhy
Hb: Docherty, Lever, Simpson
C: Cuningham, Cripps, Thomas
Hf: Prestia ,C. Curnow, Wright
F: JSOS, Casboult, Green
Foll: Kreuzer, Gibbs, Murphy
Bench: Kennedy, Williamson, Fisher, Ed Curnow
Depth: McKay, De Koning, Jones, Graham, Mullet, Shaw, Silvagni, Lobbe, Phillips, Byrne, Pickett, Rowe, O’Shea, Schumacher, Polson, Lang, Garlett, Lamb

Assuming the same injuries that we have this year - what team would have played North last night
B: Plowman, Carlisle, Touhy
Hb: Cuningham, Lever, Simpson
C: Mullet, Cripps, Thomas
Hf: Fisher, C. Curnow, Wright
F: JSOS, Casboult, Green
Foll: Kreuzer, Gibbs, E Curnow
Bench: Kennedy, Jones, JSOS, Graham (late Murphy replacement).

Hmmm... that team looks ok on paper. Certainly not an 86 pt shellacking. Would we be good enough to challenge for the top 8? The defence is much stronger, and covers for the loss of Docherty with ease, slotting a young guy in alongside a bunch of hardy veterans - a much better recipe for success. The forward line is still a weakness - not a lot different to current, although we'd have a resting mid (Prestia/Murphy/Gibbs/Cripps) at all times, so slightly ahead. The midfield is basically last year's midfield + Prestia. Fisher and Kennedy would be playing more suitalbe roles for their age, too.

On the other hand, depth is still paper thin - and its putrid for a top 8 team (its bad for a bottom team, but at least we know we're clearing the decks again this year). We're already dipping into Graham/Lamb/Jones territory for the North game and another injury or two... We'd have basically the same team, except with Touhy, Carlisle, Gibbs, Lever and Green instead of SPS, Dow, O'Brien, Weitering and Garlett (assuming the Marchbank/Prestia injuries cancel out).

Honestly, its a pretty tough one to balance out. The trade team probably wins 10-12 games and challenges for the bottom of the 8, but struggles due to a lack of scoring (and working backwards, that follows finishes of probably about the same in 2016, and around 11th-12th in 2017). So we're playing for finals now, but without a great deal more improvement to come.

The big question would be salary cap. If you could do all that and structure things to have a real crack at Tom Lynch at the end of 2018... then that trade team looks bloody good going forward. If that team is capped out, then you are really relying on Cripps/Curnow/Lever ALL becoming absolute superstars within 2-3 years or you just end up like our 2010-2012 team with a bunch of low top-8 finishes before dropping away IMO.

Now, if you change it up and put Tom Mitchell and Jaeger O'Meara in from 2016... even with cascading effects... hmmm

 

[dumb]

haven't read all the responses, but my first thought is that the football climate you're talking of is as much luck as it could be forethought. we don't really know if richmond planned to play that way when they picked their team at the start of the year or if the grand final fell their way - their talls never came on. we talk of richmond playing small but they still had talls on their list that never came good.

in some ways you have to forget what other clubs are doing and play to your own strengths, or create them.