Many thanks to Jarusa who supplied 99% of the data and probably should write this thread. I don't use spreadsheets very often - and found it hard to cut and paste to this site.

ANYWAY..............

The first Ladder indicates the number of players that have left the club to play elsewhere between 1990 and 2004.

Port Power has lost the least number of players (4) that have gone on to play more than 40 games elsewhere - not surprising given that they have not been around very long. Until I looked at Fremantle who have been around for the same amount of time. Freo have turned away or have lost 16 players, the same as the Kangaroos.

The Bullies have done well in losing only 6, while Carlton Richmond and Adelaide have lost only 7.

WCE amd Dons have lost 8, Demons and Saints have lost 9, Geelong and Hawthorn have lost 11, Brissy 12, Pies and Swans 13.

From this information, it is clear that Carlton have been able to extract the best out of their players over this period - and very few talented players have been allowed to strut their stuff at some other clubs.

Ladder showing number of players lost to other clubs.

Port Power 4
Western Bulldogs 6
Carlton 7
Richmond 7
Adelaide 7
West Coast 8
Essendon* 8
Melbourne 9
St Kilda 9
Geelong 11
Hawthorn 11
Brisbane 12
Collingwood 13
Sydney 13
Kangaroos 16
Fremantle 16



Ladder showing average number of games lost to other clubs.

Carlton 58.6
Richmond 68.1
Western Bulldogs 68.7
Melbourne 70.9
Collingwood 73.1
St Kilda 73.2
Port Power 77.0
Kangaroos 77.6
West Coast 83.8
Brisbane 85.5
Essendon* 85.9
Adelaide 86.6
Sydney 89.8
Geelong 91.7
Fremantle 96.9
Hawthorn 122.8

Remember that this is showing only those players that have played 40 or more games for other clubs. But even so, Hawthorn is an absolute disgrace. The 11 players racked up 1351 games - so far - with other clubs. Fremantle is just about as bad with their 16 players racking up an incredible 1550 games elsewhere.

Carlton comes out on top here - by far the best club in recognising talent and then hanging on to it. The 7 qualified players have so far racked up 58.6 games elsewhere. That is almost 10 games better than our nearest rival Richmond.

I would be interested to hear other people's interpretations..........

But to me, this is concrete proof that this club, our club, is the best club for a young player with ability to come to. We do not show them the door without good reason, we look after them, we nurture them, we pay them well - and for most of the players - the grass is greenest right where they are, at Princes' Park.

Show potential newcomers these figures - even Kosi might find them interesting.

Thanks again Jarusa.

_________________
Princes' Hill Expatriate

...and the next time someone asks why Aaron Hamill hurt us, tell them to read this. Good Players do not leave Carlton! Take out Judas and the players are much more impressive again. Especially given that we got rid of Beauy, Allan, Murp et al.



Nice work.

_________________
Oompa loompa doompety dee
If you are wise you'll listen to me

Unfortunately the retention of talent in the period discussed is the reason why we are in this mess.
The we are Carlton,we don't lose our players attitude, saw us to push salaries sky-high and breaching the cap was the consequence!

I think thats an unfair heading. There are some very competent people out there who've created much shame and need to be separately identifiable.

Shane Warne!

Jon Dorotich!

In defence of Hawthorn, there were extenuating circumstances in a lot of the players among those 11 (I'd like to see a list). Ben Allan (45 post-Hawthorn) left to be the captain of the Dockers, that wasn't our fault. Paul Hudson (103) moved for his own reasons. Alex McDonald (61) couldn't handle the pressure of being #1 pick, like most other #1 picks. Greg Dear (50) was past his best when he went to the Tigers. We wanted to keep Darren Jarman (121), but the Crows pinched him under much duress. Andrew Gowers (46) was poached by the Bears for more money. And the Hawks got screwed on the homesick Daniel Chick (52) and Luke McPharlin (52) trades.

That's 8 players with 530 games post-Hawthorn, for an average of just over 66. Where are you getting this average of 122.8 from 11? Those other three players must have averaged 237 games post-Hawthorn for your numbers to add up, but I can't remember anyone of that vintage.

_________________
Paul Montgomery, co-founder of FanFooty.
FanFooty is the first fully professional league-based AFL fantasy football Web site. Sign up today!

Not sure I am following your logic 7dominator.

Are you thinking that we have hung on to some players too long? The data does not support this - nor does it disprove it. So you might need to just explain this a bit further.

It might say that we have not had the wealth of talent that obviously other clubs, like Freo, have had - and squandered. That might be an indictment of our past recruiting practices.

I am not sure how it would somehow be better for us if we had a bunch of ex-Carlton players running around with other clubs racking up huge numbers of games.

To me, it says that we have made full use of whatever talent has come our way since 1990.

Anyway, I am obviously missing something.

As it was once famously stated: "Please explain."

_________________
Princes' Hill Expatriate

Oh heck, Monty, last person to challenge a Jarusa stat was found dead in a ditch after choking on percentages!

M0nty, I have absolutely no idea where I got those figures from. I can't blame Jarusa (wouldn't dare) so I have no one to blame but my calculator. I have had strong words with Mr Cassia and we both appologise unreservedly.

Number of players 11 (I did not count Paul Harding), number of games 917 (not 1427) average comes to 83.4 games per qualified player. That puts Hawthorn between the Kangaroos and West Coast - in number 9 position.

So I take it all back................

Hope that is the only win for Hawthorn this weekend.

Paul Harding 62 * pre 1990
Russell Morris 66
Dean Anderson 67
Matthew Robran 130
Greg Dear 53
Andrew Gowers 56
Scott Crow 62
Alex McDonald 61
Darren Jarman 121
Paul Barnard 140
Brad Scott 111
Michael Collica 50

Good onya M0nty - good to see supporters defending their club on this site - rather than just abusing ours.

_________________
Princes' Hill Expatriate

Robran, Barnard and Scott almost do it.

Wasn't Barnard part of the Wellman trade?

Brad Scott, what did he play for the Hawks - 1 season, 10 games, no more? I remember him as the Bad Scott but came good.

Is this the battle of the Bond wannabies???

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Thank you Jaykay. And no, I wouldn't dream of abusing Carlton or its supporters, you seem to do a good enough job of that amongst yourselves.

_________________
Paul Montgomery, co-founder of FanFooty.
FanFooty is the first fully professional league-based AFL fantasy football Web site. Sign up today!

Not sure what you don't get.Your statistics indicate that we had the least amount of players that went on to other Clubs and did well.My suggestion is simple...we paid more and thus were able to keep the list together albeit that it blew up in our face.

Essendon* are a prime example of a side that probably would have prefered to keep their list together but were forced to let players go because of the cap.Quite a number went on and did well elsewhere,(e.g Caracella) the fact that they played a lot of games with other clubs did'nt mean that the Bomber did'nt recognise talent but simply they could'nt fit them in.

Its all about list management,something that we could'nt come to grips with!