Ok i'm back on the Berger bandwagon
| TalkingCarlton http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Carlton weighs up tall order http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13268 |
Page 1 of 6 |
| Author: | fjanyc [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 3:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Carlton weighs up tall order |
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20657003-2722,00.html Boy doesn't it make you want to have the priority pick at 1 rather than 17! |
|
| Author: | billy_bongo [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 5:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Good article...Leuey's da man. |
|
| Author: | spuddie [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 7:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Carlton weighs up tall order |
fjanyc wrote: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20657003-2722,00.html
Boy doesn't it make you want to have the priority pick at 1 rather than 17! Problem is that even if last year's system was in place, we might still only have one of Gibbs or Leunberger, as the Bombers would still have pick 2 |
|
| Author: | Jayz43 [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 7:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I still think we will take Gibbs |
|
| Author: | mjonc [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ok i'm back on the Berger bandwagon
|
|
| Author: | yibbida [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: "I haven't spoken to Bryce but when I speak to Gumby and a few of the other guys, no-one wants to go that high," he said. "The lower you go the less pressure you are going to get."
Already worried about the pressure, pass. |
|
| Author: | Andain [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Carlton weighs up tall order |
spuddie wrote: fjanyc wrote: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20657003-2722,00.html Boy doesn't it make you want to have the priority pick at 1 rather than 17! Problem is that even if last year's system was in place, we might still only have one of Gibbs or Leunberger, as the Bombers would still have pick 2 Luenburger wouldn't get picked up with pick 2 if we passed on him for Gibbs 
|
|
| Author: | TheGame [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ruckman don't get too many years at their prime. They take 3 or 4 seasons to develop, have a couple of good years then their bodies give up on them. Allan, Primus, Gardiner, King, Darcy, Keating etc. All were brilliant at their best but would you choose any of them over a decade of brilliance of Nathan Buckley? I value ruckman highly but not number 1 pick in a 'super draft' highly. |
|
| Author: | dane [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
just take gibbs... even tho luey loves carlton.  why cant we just have the first 3 picks. then everyone would be happy. well except all the other teams... but that doesnt really matter does it.
|
|
| Author: | Siegfried [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
TheGame wrote: Ruckman don't get too many years at their prime. They take 3 or 4 seasons to develop, have a couple of good years then their bodies give up on them. Allan, Primus, Gardiner, King, Darcy, Keating etc. All were brilliant at their best but would you choose any of them over a decade of brilliance of Nathan Buckley?
I value ruckman highly but not number 1 pick in a 'super draft' highly. Good point Game. I was talking with Teddy yesterday, he was saying the same thing. For some reason, these days ruckmen tend to have 4 or 5 yesrs at their peak, and then wane. Who was the last ruckman to dominate the competition for 10 years? Simon Madden? Everett probably comes closest, but there is noone else for 15 years who has dominated for more than a few years. Surely for a number 1 pick, you want to get a guy who's going to dominate the game for 10-12 years, at least. As tantalising as Leuenberger seems, Gibbs for me. |
|
| Author: | Kouta [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
TheGame wrote: Ruckman don't get too many years at their prime. They take 3 or 4 seasons to develop, have a couple of good years then their bodies give up on them. Allan, Primus, Gardiner, King, Darcy, Keating etc. All were brilliant at their best but would you choose any of them over a decade of brilliance of Nathan Buckley?
I value ruckman highly but not number 1 pick in a 'super draft' highly. Would you choose Buckley over the 311 games of Nicholls or Simon Madden and flags? 
Leuenberger allegedly plays like a tall midfielder who can win the ball and push forward to kick goals so I don't see a problem with selecting him at one. Note that article claims Cox wasn't anywhere near as mobile or "elegant" in his running at the same age. 
Headland was drafted at pick one and ran home to his home state. 
Draft Leuenberger. 
|
|
| Author: | Megaman [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
yibbida wrote: Already worried about the pressure, pass.
Not sure that it really means anything but its not the first time he's made mention of not wanting the pressure of going high 
|
|
| Author: | coffee man [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The question is if both players have around equal talent/upside do we want the one who MIGHT want to go back home in 2 years or the one who would bleed navy blue blood? |
|
| Author: | GWS [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: "If you look at (Dean) Brogan and (Brendon) Lade in 2004, Jason Ball's influence in 2005 and Cox this year, the last three years have emphasised the need for quality ruckmen," Hawthorn personnel manager Chris Pelchen said. "Hence Matthew Leuenberger is being spoken about in glowing terms." And Pelchen will pinch himself if he lands Leuenberger at No.6.
When Chris Pelchen says something I listen! And do the opposite. Leuenberger is Satan. |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
All clubs with picks 4 to 8 are playing mind games - in the hope that they can get Leuenberger, Hansen or Gumbleton to fall that low. Felchen has to pull a rabbit out of the hat to make up for his @#$%&! up during trade week.
|
|
| Author: | The Tyrant [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 2:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Its not impossible that L-berg will fall to pick 6. I reckon its either Carlton, Port or Hawthorn for L-berg (and my guess is Port). The thing about Carlton is our admin is very very risk averse. They make safe boring decisions. They don't take risks that might not translate into the recruiting team, but if you can read culture you'd say there wouldn't be much chance of them dropping a bombshell and not picking Gibbs. Maybe the other clubs are spouting off trying to make it look like less of a bombshell so we are more likely to take the risk!?? |
|
| Author: | Cazzesman [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 2:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
yibbida wrote: Quote: "I haven't spoken to Bryce but when I speak to Gumby and a few of the other guys, no-one wants to go that high," he said. "The lower you go the less pressure you are going to get." Already worried about the pressure, pass. His mothers thoughts are spot on. There are thousands of uninformed supporters who would simply not be prepared to give a kid like Leuy a couple of years to find his feet and put on some weight if he went #1. The pressure is enormous so it is not unexpected that a young kid has some reservations. Those reservations come about because he knows full well there will be unreasonable expectations placed on by some fans. Expectations he is unlikely to fulfill early on and through no fault of his own, just the plain reality of physical development. Regards Cazzesman |
|
| Author: | Cazzesman [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 2:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The Tyrant wrote: Its not impossible that L-berg will fall to pick 6. I reckon its either Carlton, Port or Hawthorn for L-berg (and my guess is Port).
The thing about Carlton is our admin is very very risk averse. They make safe boring decisions. They don't take risks that might not translate into the recruiting team, but if you can read culture you'd say there wouldn't be much chance of them dropping a bombshell and not picking Gibbs. Maybe the other clubs are spouting off trying to make it look like less of a bombshell so we are more likely to take the risk!?? So reading between your lines, if WH decides to go with Leuy you would be happy as it would mean CFC were A) no longer boring & B) it was now a risk taker. 
I'm glad we have cleared that up.
Regards Cazzesman |
|
| Author: | dannyboy [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 2:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
but not from Ty Caz, not from Ty, he's a reasonable person - never gets hysterical does our Ty, never jumps the gun either apparently. 
|
|
| Author: | Bluebernz [ Sat Oct 28, 2006 2:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
GWS wrote: When Chris Pelchen says something I listen!
And do the opposite. Absolutely GWS!!! 'Sif this guy's gonna give away who he really wants at the Dorks! More CHEAP mind games from the Idiot!!  You've already proven that you are full of shit Felchin!! PISS OFF!!
It's either Gibbs or Hansen AFAIC! And Lachie wins by a short head!!
|
|
| Page 1 of 6 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|