Analysis The rebuild of Carlton and Brisbane and their future prospects

[doppleganger]

Here's my issue with what you're saying; you're not providing an alternative pathway to a competitive list by this point in time from the time those trades were made, thereby reducing your posts in this thread to hindsight critique which is so far beyond easy as to make it redundant. You refuse to even confront the issue that an AFL list needs to be 45 players, and that even the 'free hit' players in that list - players that were not the 'point' of the trade, and weren't salary dumps - were better than the players they replaced.

They weren’t.

You may have well just kept guys like Holman, Everitt, Gowers, Buckley and S.White if you wanted VFL level list cloggers on your list....and improved list continuity.

Palmer, Smedts, O’Shea, Mullet, Shaw, Lobbe, Garlett, A.Silvagni are just as poor as those blokes you already had...and are already being delisted again!

And they are miles off guys like Judd, Carrazzo, Jamison, Walker, Armitage who retired or guys like Henderson, Thouy, Gibbs who you have traded for even more kids.

Hence why Carlton are now 66 games into a ‘total reset’ and are yet to even start building.

 

[Benny78]

Tbh they both have the best rebuilds I've seen in the history of the game. Which season do you think had the strongest rebuilding clubs? Definitely 2018

 

[Gethelred]

They weren’t.

You may have well just kept guys like Holman, Everitt, Gowers, Buckley and S.White if you wanted VFL level list cloggers on your list....and improved list continuity.

Nick Holman played 22 games in 2018 at AFL level, yet averaged 12.9 possessions as a midfielder. Dylan Buckley played two games at AFL level in 2018, and averaged 7.5 disposals and 2 tackles; hardly writing home about.

Gowers is a fairly well publicised case; as shown here (https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/ho...k=2f5ef6b2e5b9cf7f3152ab066ef68423-1547343531) :

“It kind of felt like I was back at school. It was if you’d do your school day and then get excited to go to training at the end of the day. Whereas by the end of my time at Carlton (under Malthouse), I was never excited to go to training.”
“It was always my dream to be at an AFL club, but by the end of it, I wasn’t excited to go to the club. Last year I’d get hyped to go to training after a day at work and I would enjoy it so much more.
“At Carlton everything to do with my whole entire life centred around footy and that was how I walked down the street, what I ate, what I drank – every single decision I made was related to footy.
“Whereas last year, I made work and my friends and family my priority and just played footy. I’ve tried to take that approach with my second chance because not many people get a second chance, so you’ve got to make the most of it.”
“I feel like I’m a lot better prepared the second time. In the past few months I’ve felt like my time at Carlton was an apprenticeship,” he said.
“I feel like I’ve done my apprenticeship and I’m ready for the workforce now. It just feels like I’ve done a lot of the learning aspects around how to train and prepare to be an AFL player. I feel like I’m better prepared to play better on the weekend because I’m doing the right things during the week.”

He wasn't as invested in his career at the blues, not inspired to the same heights. It's borne out in what he's said about his rebirth, his new club, and about his attitude to the game.

He was at the club only for 2 years, delisted at the end of 2016 (only coached under the new Bolton system for a season) and even after the supposed rebirth as a player he averages 12.7 disposals, 2 tackles and 1.3 goals a game. He also plays tall; he's not a small forward, he's a 187cm marking forward. At the Bulldogs, Gowers plays as a full forward/third tall; tell me, who's he nicking a game from? Casboult? Curnow? McKay?

I'm happy he's made a go of it elsewhere, but Gowers was a poor fit at the time, and he's an even worse one for Carlton now.

Outside of that, those players are not on an AFL list, for good reason, and there's a reason why you've picked them out. They're the best of a poor lot, and you rather know it. It is good, though, to see someone is paying attention to what you have to do to criticise the GWS multiplayer trades, but it's difficult to argue that we didn't need to delist the majority of the people we delisted.

Palmer, Smedts, O’Shea, Mullet, Shaw, Lobbe, Garlett, A.Silvagni are just as poor as those blokes you already had...and are already being delisted again!

And they are miles off guys like Judd, Carrazzo, Jamison, Walker, Armitage who retired or guys like Henderson, Thouy, Gibbs who you have traded for even more kids.

Hence why Carlton are now 66 games into a ‘total reset’ and are yet to even start building.

Alex Silvagni is 'just as poor as the blokes you've delisted'?

You ever watched the bloke play? He was a centrepiece to the strongest Fremantle backline in history. You're spinning moonbeams here; the only reason he got delisted by Freo was because he just kept getting injured. In his first season with us - last year his second season, he never made it onto the park due to injury - he embarrassed Buddy in our win against Sydney. Go on, keep telling me how s**t Alex Silvagni is.

Aaaaaaand, we're back at you - and 10571z - ignoring anything said longer than a post ago. Without providing an alternative to these trades, you are condemning your critique to being entirely hindsight based, and therefore so completely useless as to be redundant.

 

[FFB1]

Time to drop Brisbane from this thread and make it about Carlton’s prospects and recruiting.

 

[La Dispute]

It’s the draft selections who are going to compromise our future team, along with players we have targeted via trade (Marchbank, Plowman, Kennedy, Setterfield, McGovern). Those are the players that will be scrutinised, and their success will impact the success of the rebuild as a whole.

Yeh we probably did bring in too many fringes players, and expected at least a few would go on to be best 22 players, but ‘wasting’ list spots in the first few years of a rebuild really isn’t as egregious as some are making out, and those decisions aren’t going to impact the club in the long run given how little was exchanged for them.

If the players we see as future best 22 aren’t up to it THEN the rebuild as a whole can be criticised.

 

[Robertio]

Time to drop Brisbane from this thread and make it about Carlton’s prospects and recruiting.

Nup keep the Lions in and drop the two Collingwood idiots.

 

[Gethelred]

Time to drop Brisbane from this thread and make it about Carlton’s prospects and recruiting.

I've been trying to get people to talk about Brisbane for pages on end, but the same suspects keep turning up and making it all about Carlton.

How are you feeling about your prospects next season? You content to just play pretty football, or do you want something more substantial in 2019?

 

[TooBlue14]

I do t think it matters how you rebuild in this current age of free agency. Carlton rebuilt previously on the back of Gibbs, Murphy and Kruezer and had a run of finals but didn’t get any closer than a kick from a prelim. We could do it exactly the same way this time (I think we’ve done better - more depth of talent rather than just 3 pick 1s plus Judd) but instead of just hoping it all comes together with your own developed talent you can just steal away other clubs with cash or future draft picks. Any team that sits down the bottom of the ladder long enough and is patient shpuld get to play finals 3-5 years later.

GC - obviously not patient
SAINTS - Thought they were close as Melb did and everyone predicted they would but they didn’t bring in the right mature talent to top off.
FREM/BRIS/CARL - building now all at different levels. Brisbane think they’ve done enough and have brought in Neale now but lost Rockliff and beams last two years. No injuries last year definitely helped development. Will it still continue when hodge walks away. Are the KPs good enough. Fremantle are still waiting brought in 2-3 more top 10 picks over last 2 years. Lost Neale brought in another KP. Freos KP stocks are better than Brisbane’s now but their midfield is weakest. They could need another 1-2 years of development plus a big inclusion but could be closer to sustained success than Brisbane. Carlton built KPs first. A lot of 3rd to 4th year players playing together. A lot of injuries and limited midfield in 2018 cost them maintaining their position amongst these 3 and are now well off the pace. Allowed them to bring in a special talent in Walsh that’s going to blow everyone away year 1. RS lock. Midfield is targeted to go past all these teams very quickly when they build AFL bodies.
NOW:
Defence: Bris > Frem > Carl
Midfield: Bris > Frem > Carl
Forward: Bris > Carl > Frem

LATER (my opinion)
Defence: Bris > Carl > Frem
Midfield: Carl > Bris > Frem
Forward: Carl > Frem > Bris

 

[Brutalitops]

I've been trying to get people to talk about Brisbane for pages on end, but the same suspects keep turning up and making it all about Carlton.

How are you feeling about your prospects next season? You content to just play pretty football, or do you want something more substantial in 2019?

Cant see them having great prospects without adding Lambert to their list

 

[bungalow_bill]

The list is chock full of kids. Most were taken high in their draft years (and around where they were unanimously rated), so the talent is more likely there than not.

Our issue is youth. Our midfield this year is Ed Curnow, Murphy, Cripps... and then Dow, SPS, Fisher, Settefield, Walsh, Stocker, Kennedy. Those last 7 names are (on average) 19 years old and with an average of under 20 games to their names. That said, there are 4 x top 5 draft picks in there (Setters, Walsh, Dow and SPS) and Kennedy, Fisher and Stocker were both taken with 1sts/ early seconds.

Our backline is in the same boat re youth (Alongside the ageing Simpson and Thomas we have Docherty, Weitering, Plowman, Marchbank, Williamson, Obrien etc) as are our core Forwards (Casboult and now Fasolo are side by side with Curnow, McKay, SOSOS and to a lesser extent, McGovern).

We've retained a handful of senior players, and just gone bananas at the draft assembling a solid core of young kids around Cripps and Doc.

This year and next will be development years. You dont expect much from kids aged 18-22 other than glimpses and development (there are outliers of course, but the general rule is that it takes 100 or so games and 4 or so preseasons to 'click').

The goal now is to develop those kids well (that is key) while also going as hard as we can for trades and F/A over the next few years.

We're in dire need of a quality small forward and a Ruck replacement for Kruezer. A senior midfielder in the Kelly/ Cognilio mold wouldnt go astray either.

Minor correction - SPS was not a top 5 pick.

Carry on

 

[Baird]

Alex Silvagni is 'just as poor as the blokes you've delisted'?

You ever watched the bloke play? He was a centrepiece to the strongest Fremantle backline in history.

Silvagni was depth at Fremantle

 

[Baird]

Is there anything funnier than watching Carlton fans trying to defend crazy sossy's list management? It's nearing Essendon levels of denial

 

[Gethelred]

Silvagni was depth at Fremantle

... because he kept getting injured. When he was fit, he was first 22.

Is there anything funnier than watching Carlton fans trying to defend crazy sossy's list management? It's nearing Essendon levels of denial

I see now that the main board has a similar level of discourse to the Bay.

Perhaps I was wrong to point out to opposition fans when they tell people to go back to the Carlton main board what they're doing. Perhaps I should instead be telling them to go Bay 13, to better fit in with their own and just sling as much mud as possible without repercussion.

 

[Malifice]

You've hit the draft hard, which is good. You've taken 11 players from the top 30 of the National Draft in the last 4 years. That gives the club every chance to succeed with a bit of luck and quality development.

However, I do question the castoffs you've imported from other clubs since 2015. But perhaps they were calculated decisions with little downside that didn't overly impede upon the integrity of your list.

The cast-offs we've gotten into the club since 2015 were all brought in short term, to fill that gaping hole of senior bodies we lacked and to provide some senior bodies and protection for the kids. Importantly, we didnt pay for any of them.

Remember; we blew every single draft from 2007-2014. 8 x 1st rounders, gone - many without playing more than a handful of games. Second, third and later round picks (and rookie picks) fared no better. We netted (from a combined total of 8 years of drafting) around 4 players that are still on our list from the drafts of 2007-2014. Count them; four players in 8 years. Kruezer, Casboult, Ed Curnow and Cripps.

Leading into 2015 we had a massive hole of players aged in the 21-27 age bracket (the players that should have been picked up in those draft years, that would have been 21-27 years old). We had Cripps and Docherty as 19 and 20 year olds, then daylight in the 21-27 bracket, then Murphy, Gibbs, Kruezer and Simpson (players taken 2002-2007) as quality in the 27+ bracket.

We were already s**t (everything was left to the senior 5 players, leading a team of largely spuds), and were headed off a massive cliff in a few years when those senior blokes retired. We would have been stuck with a list of Cripps and Docherty, and nothing else.

We made the call to basically hit the 'reset' button at that time, and spend the next 3 years assembing as many good kids as we could around Cripps and Docherty.

Here is the issue with 'getting in good players via trades/ F/A' during the reset:

The problem we had was (as you blokes found out) you cant just push everyone out the door in one hit, strip the place of senior talent, and have no senior bodies to protect the kids. However, we certainly were not in a position to attract quality free agents (the list was s**t and they wouldnt come) or to bring in quality in trades (trades cost 1st round picks, and we needed the 1st round picks for kids). Accordingly the decision was made to get in senior bodies for a year or two to plug that 21-27 year old age gap, and protect the kids so we didnt have to rush them into the seniors too soon, without paying anything for these senior players brought in (without jeopardizing our ability to reset the core of the list by losing 1st round picks).

Look at the senior players (in the 21-27 age bracket) brought in over the past few years (2015-2017), and what we paid for them:

Lobbe (Pick 93; not used in the draft)
Palmer (Pick 125; not used in the draft)
Mullet (DFA)
A Silvagni (DFA)
O Shea (DFA)
Kerridge (part of a trade with Adelaide where they got Menzel - Menzel was delisted after playing 2 games for the Crows and we got Kerridge and a second round pick)
Shaw (DFA)
Lamb (DFA)

etc, etc etc.

Those guys were all brought in to fill a list spot for a year or two, protect the kids (stop us from exposing the kids too early), provide senior bodies etc without costing anything or weakening our draft hand (costing anything Picks). Certainly none of them we expected to do anything more than provide a year or two of holding a place on the list, while we went heavy at the draft.

Now that 'Phase One' is complete, and we have the core of a list around Cripps and Doc, we now feel we can change gears in list management and start to get in A grade players and quality to fill list spots (Phase two). You saw it a bit last year when we chased Shiel, and you'll see it ramped up to a new level this year when we go all out for quality F/A and Trades.

Seriously; the next few years we are going to have everything (in terms of picks and money) on the table for quality talent in the 23-27 age bracket.

 

[Malifice]

Is there anything funnier than watching Carlton fans trying to defend crazy sossy's list management? It's nearing Essendon levels of denial

Only the joy of a moderator infracting someone for trolling on the main board.

Careful. Contribute, or leave.

 

[10571z]

Nick Holman played 22 games in 2018 at AFL level, yet averaged 12.9 possessions as a midfielder. Dylan Buckley played two games at AFL level in 2018, and averaged 7.5 disposals and 2 tackles; hardly writing home about.

Gowers is a fairly well publicised case; as shown here (https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/ho...k=2f5ef6b2e5b9cf7f3152ab066ef68423-1547343531) :


He wasn't as invested in his career at the blues, not inspired to the same heights. It's borne out in what he's said about his rebirth, his new club, and about his attitude to the game.

He was at the club only for 2 years, delisted at the end of 2016 (only coached under the new Bolton system for a season) and even after the supposed rebirth as a player he averages 12.7 disposals, 2 tackles and 1.3 goals a game. He also plays tall; he's not a small forward, he's a 187cm marking forward. At the Bulldogs, Gowers plays as a full forward/third tall; tell me, who's he nicking a game from? Casboult? Curnow? McKay?

I'm happy he's made a go of it elsewhere, but Gowers was a poor fit at the time, and he's an even worse one for Carlton now.

Outside of that, those players are not on an AFL list, for good reason, and there's a reason why you've picked them out. They're the best of a poor lot, and you rather know it. It is good, though, to see someone is paying attention to what you have to do to criticise the GWS multiplayer trades, but it's difficult to argue that we didn't need to delist the majority of the people we delisted.


Alex Silvagni is 'just as poor as the blokes you've delisted'?

You ever watched the bloke play? He was a centrepiece to the strongest Fremantle backline in history. You're spinning moonbeams here; the only reason he got delisted by Freo was because he just kept getting injured. In his first season with us - last year his second season, he never made it onto the park due to injury - he embarrassed Buddy in our win against Sydney. Go on, keep telling me how s**t Alex Silvagni is.

Aaaaaaand, we're back at you - and 10571z - ignoring anything said longer than a post ago. Without providing an alternative to these trades, you are condemning your critique to being entirely hindsight based, and therefore so completely useless as to be redundant.

An alternate to these trades? oh ok. Well every other team has managed to rebuild without taking 12 players from 1 club but ok.

 

[Malifice]

Now you will have to continue to make shockingly high list changes as you delist the ‘salary dumps’ or whatever the buzz name Carlton fans give them, see veterans like Simpson and Murphy retire, and then start to delist draft picks that aren’t going to make it.

I dont know if you've been keeping up on current events, but the salary dumps and senior players we brought in to protect the kids are almost all already gone, as are all the senior blokes we brought in as list placeholders.

Mullet, Shaw, Palmer, Kerridge, Oshea, Lamb, Wright, ASOS, Sumner etc are all delisted. Only Lobbe remains (and we need a back-up ruckman still due to the fact our other two rucks in Kruezer and Phillips are constantly injured).

From the list of kids brought in by SOS (2015 onwards), the only ones we've delisted to date is Glass McKasker and Gallucci and they were rookie selections in 2015. Matt Korchek retired (he was a USA international ruck Cat B from 2015) also. Most of the kids brought in by SOS from 2015 onwards have signed contract extensions beyond this year, so we wont be delisting them any time soon.

Our likely delistings this year (at this very early stage) are Casboult, Pickett (poor bloke is constantly injured), Lang and Lebois plus maybe one or two more (Kerr and Schumacher want to get a wriggle on and show a bit), Simpson and Thomas are year to year prospects also.

We've made 55+ list changes over the past 3 years. Our list turnover has been 'Clayton Oliver' levels of unprecedented. We wont be making many de-listings this year other than the mandatory number of changes, and will throw everything we have at luring 2-3 gun free agents/ trades across the line.

 

[Hannabal]

The cast-offs we've gotten into the club since 2015 were all brought in short term, to fill that gaping hole of senior bodies we lacked and to provide some senior bodies and protection for the kids. Importantly, we didnt pay for any of them.

Remember; we blew every single draft from 2007-2014. 8 x 1st rounders, gone - many without playing more than a handful of games. Second, third and later round picks (and rookie picks) fared no better. We netted (from a combined total of 8 years of drafting) around 4 players that are still on our list from the drafts of 2007-2014. Count them; four players in 8 years. Kruezer, Casboult, Ed Curnow and Cripps.

Leading into 2015 we had a massive hole of players aged in the 21-27 age bracket (the players that should have been picked up in those draft years, that would have been 21-27 years old). We had Cripps and Docherty as 19 and 20 year olds, then daylight in the 21-27 bracket, then Murphy, Gibbs, Kruezer and Simpson (players taken 2002-2007) as quality in the 27+ bracket.

We were already s**t (everything was left to the senior 5 players, leading a team of largely spuds), and were headed off a massive cliff in a few years when those senior blokes retired. We would have been stuck with a list of Cripps and Docherty, and nothing else.

We made the call to basically hit the 'reset' button at that time, and spend the next 3 years assembing as many good kids as we could around Cripps and Docherty.

Here is the issue with 'getting in good players via trades/ F/A' during the reset:

The problem we had was (as you blokes found out) you cant just push everyone out the door in one hit, strip the place of senior talent, and have no senior bodies to protect the kids. However, we certainly were not in a position to attract quality free agents (the list was s**t and they wouldnt come) or to bring in quality in trades (trades cost 1st round picks, and we needed the 1st round picks for kids). Accordingly the decision was made to get in senior bodies for a year or two to plug that 21-27 year old age gap, and protect the kids so we didnt have to rush them into the seniors too soon, without paying anything for these senior players brought in (without jeopardizing our ability to reset the core of the list by losing 1st round picks).

Look at the senior players (in the 21-27 age bracket) brought in over the past few years (2015-2017), and what we paid for them:

Lobbe (Pick 93; not used in the draft)
Palmer (Pick 125; not used in the draft)
Mullet (DFA)
A Silvagni (DFA)
O Shea (DFA)
Kerridge (part of a trade with Adelaide where they got Menzel - Menzel was delisted after playing 2 games for the Crows and we got Kerridge and a second round pick)
Shaw (DFA)
Lamb (DFA)

etc, etc etc.

Those guys were all brought in to fill a list spot for a year or two, protect the kids (stop us from exposing the kids too early), provide senior bodies etc without costing anything or weakening our draft hand (costing anything Picks). Certainly none of them we expected to do anything more than provide a year or two of holding a place on the list, while we went heavy at the draft.

Now that 'Phase One' is complete, and we have the core of a list around Cripps and Doc, we now feel we can change gears in list management and start to get in A grade players and quality to fill list spots (Phase two). You saw it a bit last year when we chased Shiel, and you'll see it ramped up to a new level this year when we go all out for quality F/A and Trades.

Seriously; the next few years we are going to have everything (in terms of picks and money) on the table for quality talent in the 23-27 age bracket.

I know why you brought them in, I was more questioning who you brought in. That said, like Melbourne was, you were an ugly sister, so you probably had little choice. That may change. Certainly McGovern was a good get.

 

[Malifice]

I know why you brought them in, I was more questioning who you brought in.

What did we pay for them again? They were virtually all DFA's or picks in the 90's plus (that we'rent used at the draft in any event).

When you're only getting in a player for a year or two, to enable you to hit the draft hard, and to protect the kids, then that's a fair enough price.

We didnt get in Mullets, Palmers, Osheas, Lambs, Kerridges, Shaws etc to be star players for us. We brought them in on short 1 year contracts (and occasional 2 year contracts) to provide coverage in that 21-28 year old age bracket that we had no players in. And by 'no-players' in that age bracket, I dont mean we had s**t players in that age bracket; we literally had next to no players in that age bracket (on account of blowing every single draft from 2007-2014).

The only other way we could have gotten players in for free (in terms of draft picks) was F/A and F/A dont go to clubs that are clearly rebuilding. They leave for flags, going to sides at the top, or clearly on the way there.

We've been able to bank a sizeable hunk of the Salary Cap for the past 3 years, and have locked all our players away on long term frontloaded deals. With Murphy, Simpson, Thomas set to retire soon, will have even more money spare.

Watch this space. We'll be big players in trade and F/A this year, and next year, and again the year after.

 

[10571z]

I know why you brought them in, I was more questioning who you brought in. That said, like Melbourne was, you were an ugly sister, so you probably had little choice. That may change. Certainly McGovern was a good get.

Not sure why they think paying nothing for players and bringing them into your club is a good thing. There is a reason these clubs are trading for pick 90.

If you wanted to protect the kids not sure why these sort of players were brought in.

 

[Malifice]

Minor correction - SPS was not a top 5 pick.

Carry on

Good point; we bid on Setterfield first with pick 5, and GWS matched our bid, meaning we took SPS at 6.

We now have both players.

 

[Malifice]

If you wanted to protect the kids not sure why these sort of players were brought in.

Who would you have brought in instead?

Remember, you cant use early draft picks, and you also have to convince these players to come to a club that had the list management problems we have, and was in the same hole, and years away from a flag.

You're also competing against 16 other clubs for their services.

Aaaaand go.

 

[10571z]

Who would you have brought in instead?

Remember, you cant use early draft picks, and you also have to convince these players to come to a club that had the list management problems we have, and was in the same hole, and years away from a flag.

You're also competing against 16 other clubs for their services.

Aaaaand go.

Your making it out this path was the only possible way to rebuild.

Hit the draft with the picks you had and attack free agency. Instead as stated SOS brought in a host of names which just arent up to AFL.

The choice is to not trade them in full stop. If pies brought in 10 spuds with picks 80/90 would i be sitting here arguing you couldn't do better with those picks?

 

[Tbonefreo]

... because he kept getting injured. When he was fit, he was first 22.

I see now that the main board has a similar level of discourse to the Bay.

Perhaps I was wrong to point out to opposition fans when they tell people to go back to the Carlton main board what they're doing. Perhaps I should instead be telling them to go Bay 13, to better fit in with their own and just sling as much mud as possible without repercussion.

When Alex S got a good run at it, he was on his way to quality.

Coulda been

 

[Malifice]

Your making it out this path was the only possible way to rebuild.

Hit the draft with the picks you had and attack free agency.

What free agents are coming to a side that just finished last, and is set for several years down the bottom as a consequence of needing a total list rebuild due to ******* up the prior 8 years of drafting?

And we did hit the draft with the picks we had. No club has hit the draft harder over a 3 year period barring the expansion clubs.

The choice is to not trade them in full stop. If pies brought in 10 spuds with picks 80/90 would i be sitting here arguing you couldn't do better with those picks?

We brought those players in to be AFL ready players in the 22-28 year old age bracket (that we had no players in) to provide some senior bodies for a year or two to enable us to draft a brand new list.

Out of the following list (ASOS, Shaw, Lamb, Kerridge, Mullet, Gorringe, Palmer, Lobbe, Wright, Oshea) we paid a grand total of [Menzel (now delisted) and Picks 93 and 125 - both of which were not used], and we got a second rounder back. The rest were DFA.

Ger it yet? They were drafted to provide senior bodies for a year or two, to enable us to hit the draft. We paid nothing for them (in terms of $$$ and list positions). They were brought in for a reason, and they played a role. They allowed us to develop kids in the 2's instead of rushing them into the seniors, an to fill in some experience in an age bracket we were light in, while the kids were drafted and developed.

I would have loved to have gotten in Kelly, Martin, Fyfe, Gawn, Bontempelli and Brown instead, but lets be ******* real here shall we?