R17 Vs Lions @ CAZALY'S

[i'm-uninformed2]

I thought Hayward was outstanding, and has been since he got the mid season kick up the bum.

The player you’d like him to become is what Adelaide’s Tom Lynch was at his peak. Hayward has the nous, marking skills, lead up patterns and kicking ability.

He just now needs the tank, and signs in the second half of the year say he’s getting there.

[MattW]

I thought Hayward was outstanding, and has been since he got the mid season kick up the bum.

The player you’d like him to become is what Adelaide’s Tom Lynch was at his peak. Hayward has the nous, marking skills, lead up patterns and kicking ability.

He just now needs the tank, and signs in the second half of the year say he’s getting there.

He's fixed that set shot too, which is helping him.

[lwjoyner]

I too would like Lions to win the lag, it will be the last any northern club wins if the AFL get rid of NEAFL and make us all team up a VFL team, by the way there is not enough non aligned clubs.
Should not let Vic clubs have a team in the VFL, by the ay WA and SA have standalone reserve teams as well.

[AnnieH]

Even I picked the lions.
I think had it not been raining, we would have won.
One more round to go, then this awful footy year will be over.
Damn you, covid.

[mcs]

Ay. It is true that you and I don't see eye to eye where assessing youth is concerned. Perhaps I am too close minded. However I judge footballers by only one standard: how their footy will hold up in finals. Blakey is a bean-pole. It is one thing to start him as a rover in a home and away match in a shortened fixture. It is another to do so in a preliminary final. He would get pummelled from pillar to post in a finals-like atmosphere, and wouldn't get away with the cute antics he tries to do on a weekly basis. Needs to develop a hard edge to work his way into a game when it's not going his way.

McInerney stands in space and amasses possessions at will. Forget about that in a final. Any A-grade defensive structure will not allow their opponent's wingman to be waiting in the corridor to just pick up any loose ball there for the taking. He will be exposed badly in match-ups that won't cater to his uncontested game.

Wicks and Bell at some point are going to have to show more than just how to tackle. Their endeavour is pleasing but do they have any other abilities? Anything else to offer talent-wise? If this were a final, you'd want to hope you have two members of the team contributing more than just tackles.

It's a measuring standard that has rarely proven me wrong over the decades. Because when compiling a list, you don't just want players who will contribute to a win here and there. We need reliable players who possess qualities that are pressure-proof. Some of ours have shown these qualities, though to what degree you and I likely don't agree - Dawson, McCartin, Rowbottom, even Ling showed traits that would hold him in good stead in a high pressure match. Florent, Hayward, Blakey, McInerney, Wicks, Bell.. .. I am not so confident. They have individual games that any coach worth his salt will easily be able to put the clamps on. So it is a judgment that might be premature, but is rooted in valid concern.

Not saying there aren't concerns - have never said that. But I'd suggest you aren't giving some players any reasonable opportunity to actually develop as AFL footballers - but rather making premature judgments on a very limited evidence base. Indeed earlier in the year you wrote off players that haven't even played for the seniors yets - including a first year player.

We've discussed this before - would you have thrown GAJ to the fires because he didn't really show too much for several seasons beyond being a good afl player (far from elite), and never looked like an elite midfielder until his 5th or 6th season? He is one of so many players that have started in a team in one role, and ended up being a superstar somewhere else. I.e. as he built afl experience, he developed his game to fit. Would you have thrown goodesy away, or Kirk away because in the early years when they didn't show so much? Or Jude Bolton?

If a player came in at 100% of his level on day 1 in our game, and that was the peak - then I would understand. But its been shown so many times that so many players only really hit their straps come in the 50-100 game point of their career, some even later than that. That isn't to say we have to ride and hold with every single player - the game doesn't work like that. Players develop their game over time - its not a stagnant thing.

That isn't to say your judgments on any of those players will prove to be wrong. But just enjoy the ride a bit and lets see what they can do, for as a club I think we need to avoid the premature approach of throwing the baby out every 5 minutes with the bathwater and starting again. That's how you become Carlton.

[KSAS]

Thought there was merit in Gerard Healy's comment that Allir's best position moving forward is as Forward/2nd ruck if Tom McCartin becomes permanent Key Defender alongside Melican and Rampe.

[Kafka's Ghost]

Not saying there aren't concerns - have never said that. But I'd suggest you aren't giving some players any reasonable opportunity to actually develop as AFL footballers - but rather making premature judgments on a very limited evidence base. Indeed earlier in the year you wrote off players that haven't even played for the seniors yets - including a first year player.

We've discussed this before - would you have thrown GAJ to the fires because he didn't really show too much for several seasons beyond being a good afl player (far from elite), and never looked like an elite midfielder until his 5th or 6th season? He is one of so many players that have started in a team in one role, and ended up being a superstar somewhere else. I.e. as he built afl experience, he developed his game to fit. Would you have thrown goodesy away, or Kirk away because in the early years when they didn't show so much? Or Jude Bolton?

If a player came in at 100% of his level on day 1 in our game, and that was the peak - then I would understand. But its been shown so many times that so many players only really hit their straps come in the 50-100 game point of their career, some even later than that. That isn't to say we have to ride and hold with every single player - the game doesn't work like that. Players develop their game over time - its not a stagnant thing.


That isn't to say your judgments on any of those players will prove to be wrong. But just enjoy the ride a bit and lets see what they can do, for as a club I think we need to avoid the premature approach of throwing the baby out every 5 minutes with the bathwater and starting again. That's how you become Carlton.

Totally agree with this assessment. I for one have enjoyed seeing the young guys run this year, knowing it was a development year. As with all young teams they’re inconsistent, but with a bit more senior support and another pre-season or two, that will come. McInerney looks elite as a winger, and McCartin and Melican will be our next Reg and Teddy. Forward line still a work in progress, but if Lewy Taylor can rediscover his fitness and form and Hewitt gets back to help out, the midfield is taking shape. Keen to see who is drafted in the top 10 this year. Stephens will be a gun.

[TheBloods]

Not saying there aren't concerns - have never said that. But I'd suggest you aren't giving some players any reasonable opportunity to actually develop as AFL footballers - but rather making premature judgments on a very limited evidence base. Indeed earlier in the year you wrote off players that haven't even played for the seniors yets - including a first year player.

We've discussed this before - would you have thrown GAJ to the fires because he didn't really show too much for several seasons beyond being a good afl player (far from elite), and never looked like an elite midfielder until his 5th or 6th season? He is one of so many players that have started in a team in one role, and ended up being a superstar somewhere else. I.e. as he built afl experience, he developed his game to fit. Would you have thrown goodesy away, or Kirk away because in the early years when they didn't show so much? Or Jude Bolton?

If a player came in at 100% of his level on day 1 in our game, and that was the peak - then I would understand. But its been shown so many times that so many players only really hit their straps come in the 50-100 game point of their career, some even later than that. That isn't to say we have to ride and hold with every single player - the game doesn't work like that. Players develop their game over time - its not a stagnant thing.

That isn't to say your judgments on any of those players will prove to be wrong. But just enjoy the ride a bit and lets see what they can do, for as a club I think we need to avoid the premature approach of throwing the baby out every 5 minutes with the bathwater and starting again. That's how you become Carlton.

There is a difference between reserving excitement over our youth and actively not enjoying the ride. I enjoy watching these young fellas have a crack and take the game on against players who are bigger, stronger and wiser. I am just unconvinced that a lot of them will forge any legitimate career in the long term. After all, we are in a developing year, so as much as it's fine and dandy to enjoy what the youth show every week, it all has to be in the context of how they'll fit in the future.

Finals have a way of blowing up team's plans. A player could excel all year but if they're exposed badly in finals matches, coaches will often re-work them into a different role that can sometimes leave the player redundant. So don't mistake those lingering, long-term doubts with me not enjoying watching them give it a go every week. They're two separate cases.

It gives me solace that there are at least a few who will, at worst, be good 200-game players. McCartin (especially McCartin), Dawson, Paddlebum, Mills and Papley. Their best could be anything. I hope more will put their hand up in the next year or so, but I suspect anyone that does will come from the draft, so are not yet on the list... (Campbell, Gulden, McDonald)

[Markwebbos]

There is a difference between reserving excitement over our youth and actively not enjoying the ride. I enjoy watching these young fellas have a crack and take the game on against players who are bigger, stronger and wiser. I am just unconvinced that a lot of them will forge any legitimate career in the long term. After all, we are in a developing year, so as much as it's fine and dandy to enjoy what the youth show every week, it all has to be in the context of how they'll fit in the future.

Finals have a way of blowing up team's plans. A player could excel all year but if they're exposed badly in finals matches, coaches will often re-work them into a different role that can sometimes leave the player redundant. So don't mistake those lingering, long-term doubts with me not enjoying watching them give it a go every week. They're two separate cases.

It gives me solace that there are at least a few who will, at worst, be good 200-game players. McCartin (especially McCartin), Dawson, Paddlebum, Mills and Papley. Their best could be anything. I hope more will put their hand up in the next year or so, but I suspect anyone that does will come from the draft, so are not yet on the list... (Campbell, Gulden, McDonald)

I like how you have us picking up McDonald. He sounds like a great prospect, but reckon he goes top 3 before us. I heard him on Road to the Draft explaining how he developed as a midfielder and then had a growth spurt.

Do hope we draft a genuine ruck prospect rather than pick up a long-shot in the rookie draft (if there even is a rookie draft). I do like the sound of Henry Walsh (B-o-S). Thilthorpe for some reason sounds like he's not quite a forward and not quite a ruck. I'm sure I'll be proved wrong about that.

[Blood Fever]

There is a difference between reserving excitement over our youth and actively not enjoying the ride. I enjoy watching these young fellas have a crack and take the game on against players who are bigger, stronger and wiser. I am just unconvinced that a lot of them will forge any legitimate career in the long term. After all, we are in a developing year, so as much as it's fine and dandy to enjoy what the youth show every week, it all has to be in the context of how they'll fit in the future.

Finals have a way of blowing up team's plans. A player could excel all year but if they're exposed badly in finals matches, coaches will often re-work them into a different role that can sometimes leave the player redundant. So don't mistake those lingering, long-term doubts with me not enjoying watching them give it a go every week. They're two separate cases.

It gives me solace that there are at least a few who will, at worst, be good 200-game players. McCartin (especially McCartin), Dawson, Paddlebum, Mills and Papley. Their best could be anything. I hope more will put their hand up in the next year or so, but I suspect anyone that does will come from the draft, so are not yet on the list... (Campbell, Gulden, McDonald)

With the certainty you display as an analyst, you should apply for a job in list management at a AFL club.

[barry]

I can see "TheBloods" point of view. We dont want to end up like Norf, where for years they crowed about their 'youth' and how it was just a matter of time before they were a powerhouse. Unfortunetly, the youth didnt kick on.

We need to be cautious of our list. Right now the list can only managed 4 or 5 wins for the year, so thats exactly where they are at. We still need substantial improvement just to make finals, and then more improvement to win a flag.

However, its going to be an exciting few years ahead as it looks like we are turning the corner from our downward fall, and its much nicer to be climbing up the ladder with a young list (us), than falling down the ladder with an old list (hawks).

[TheBloods]

With the certainty you display as an analyst, you should apply for a job in list management at a AFL club.

The only certainty is that only 17% of drafted players make it to 100 games, 9% to 150 games, 4% to 200 games, and under 2% to 250 games. Many of those that didn't make it would've at some stage been young kids who showed enormous promise as juniors, or who played some quality games at AFL/VFL level. They just didn't have enough. So it's foolish to expect that every youth who plays a good match is on the right path. The harsh reality is that a lot of them will amount to nothing, including some who played last night.

- - - Updated - - -

I can see "TheBloods" point of view. We dont want to end up like Norf, where for years they crowed about their 'youth' and how it was just a matter of time before they were a powerhouse. Unfortunetly, the youth didnt kick on.

We need to be cautious of our list. Right now the list can only managed 4 or 5 wins for the year, so thats exactly where they are at. We still need substantial improvement just to make finals, and then more improvement to win a flag.

However, its going to be an exciting few years ahead as it looks like we are turning the corner from our downward fall, and its much nicer to be climbing up the ladder with a young list (us), than falling down the ladder with an old list (hawks).

Yes we are certainly heading in the right direction. Learning to win this year while relying less on the usual suspects has been a strength that we might not have gained if we had a full strength team every week. There will be some sorting the wheat from the chaff over the next year or so though so that we avoid the North Melbourne fate you speak of.