Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Poll

Who is the best 5 bench players to go with the existing lineup below?

*** currently vacant
*****Backline group*****2 - Lachie Cowan
3 - Jesse Motlop
4 - Oliver Hollands
*****Midfield group*****5 - Adam Cerra
*****Forwards group*****6 - Zac Williams
*****Midfield group*****7 - Jagga Smith
8 - Lachie Fogarty
*****Midfield group*****9 - Patrick Cripps
*****Forwards group*****10 - Harry McKay
11 - Mitch McGovern
*****Forwards group*****12 - Ben Ainsworth
13 - Blake Acres
14 - Ollie Florent
15 - Billy Wilson
16 - Ben Camporeale
*****Forwards group*****17 - Brodie Kemp
*****Midfield group*****18 - Sam Walsh
*****Forwards group*****19 - Will Hayward
***20 - Elijah Hollands - currently not on our list
21 - Lucas Camporeale
*****Backline group*****22 - Harry O'Farrell
*****Backline group*****23 - Jacob Weitering
*****Backline group*****24 - Nick Newman
25 - Liam Reidy
*****Backline group*****26 - Nick Haynes
*****Midfield group*****27 - Marc Pittonet
28 - Harry Charleson
*****Midfield group*****29 - George Hewitt
30 - Jack Ison
31 - Campbell Chesser
32 - Matthew Carroll
33 - Lewis Young
34 - Rob Monahan
35 - Harry Dean
36 - Cooper Lord
37 - Jordan Boyd
***38 - Will White - currently not on our list
39 - Talor Byrne
40 - Hudson O'Keeffe
41 - Matt Duffy
*****Backline group*****42 - Adam Saad
*****Forwards group*****43 - Ashton Moir
44 - Francis Evans
45 - Flynn Young
46 - Matt Cottrell
Topic: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench (Read 1575 times) previous topic - next topic
everblue, DJC, Lods and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #30 –
Quote from: DJC – on
Quote from: Lods – on


I said the debate centred around whether we would improve stay the same or go backwards in 2026 compared to 2025.
And on that basis you can only judge on what was on display in 2025
Florent didn't have a great year compared to his previous year.
I don't think I've mentioned him much.
Defence wasn't really a concern...our issues stemmed more around entry to the 50 the ability to keep it there, and forward efficiency.

Anyway, we'll see how Ollie goes this year.

https://www.carltonfc.com.au/video/1941089/micd-up-ollie-florent-at-training?videoId=1941089&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1765440286001

Ollie played as well as his coach allowed him to.  Inexplicable coaching from someone who seems out of their depth.

I think that Ollie will make quite an impression next season both on the field and with his energy and leadership at training.

So Ollies issue wasn't talent. He pissed off the coach. Sure, plausible.
But...
Charlies issue wasn't talent either. He was forced to play injured to the point he was a liability.

Ollie we blame the coach.
Charlie we DONT blame the coach?

Remembering, Charlie got offered up for 3x first rounders and Ollie was steak knives......but Ollie will be better for us than Charlie?

What the hell are you drinking and where do i get some?

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #31 –
Quote from: Thryleon – on
Quote from: kruddler – on
I just said similar in another thread.
All outgoing players are now no good.
All incoming players have never played a bad game or missed a game through injury.
Its hypocrisy.

Take them all at 'average' levels and go from there.
You'll come up with the same conclusion if you are honest.
How can you measure a players Average output?

I.e.  Hayward?  His formline stacks up over 3 years.  Florent was sidelined by his coach, not his ability.  So not sure its fair to do that with him, and Ainsworth had a solid year. 

We are saying all these guys have to do is back up 2025 form, vs the outgoings 2025 form.  Thats 11 games without being subbed off injured for JSOS.

Charlie went bog average by key forward standards.  18 games for 32 goals.  1.8 goals a game.  Sure he kicked 27 behinds, but we wont miss those.  All we need is Kemp to chime in for 18 games and kick 30.  That will cover Charlie.  Hayward and Ainsworth might make up the rest, if Kemp falls short, and Skull is a wildcard here.  Played 5 games, kicked 3 goals.

TDK the ruckman is more of a unicorn than not.  Thing is, you yourself @kruddler  have stated that Pittonet shades him.  So if Pittonet Shades him, TDK's 2025 was a mixed bag, where he was generally good for half the season and then came back to the field.  Rucks are easier to cover, you just need a competitor.  I.e.  Is Cameron a better ruck than Grundy?  Probably not.  Cameron has played better footy than Grundy more often.  Collingwood didnt miss him.  Maybe we will have Pittonet finally have a consistent run.

JSOS.  I love the guy.  Is a competitor, hates being beaten.  Thing is, he played 13 games, and missed 2024 completely.  He was also not present for most of our best footy in 2023, and hasnt even played a final yet for us.  Are we really going to pine about that now? 

It reeks of agenda.  What happened to being measured?

For those of us on my side of the fence, we are fighting off people like yourself who can't seem to agree on where the issues are (or aren't)

I've been arguing about rucks for years and didn;t get many an ally in any of it.
Now it seems 'everyone agrees with me' and are using my arguments as if they were their own. You can't have it both ways.
I'm not rehashing years worth of arguments about those 2.

Going back to the heart of the matter....how do you measure average?

Let me try and explain with the 'olympic scoring' method.
Take out the best and the worst and work with whats left.
So ignore charlies injury year. Take out his best coleman year. Work with whats left. Pretty consistent and consistently above anything we got in.
Using the same logic with Hayward. Take out his 41 goal year and his best was 34 goals. If Charlies worst year last year was 32.
So who is better?

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #32 –
Doesn't work that way Kruddler, we take the traitor's worst and our new player's best, even Chesser's 4 games lol.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #33 –
Quote from: madbluboy – on
Doesn't work that way Kruddler, we take the traitor's worst and our new player's best, even Chesser's 4 games lol.

Don't forget Reidy and his 3 games.
...and Hudson O'Keeffe has played 5 games and between them we've got cover for both TDK and Charlie.
Simples.

But don't be fooled, its not like for like.
You have to include Hayward and Ainsworth. Not sure who they are replacing, but they will pick up the slack.

Of course, not a single person has mentioned that McKays life will now be harder as Charlie is no longer the #1 target, he is, so his output will fall....if he can even stay on the park with his mental issues...but shhh.....don't say anything.....you'll just be labelled negative.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #34 –
There is some seriously warped interpretations of what people are actually saying.
So far off the mark it's ridiculous.
Lost the plot completely.


I suspect some need a cup of tea, a Bex and a good lie down.

Saying Ollie may give us good service is nowhere near saying he's better than Charlie Curnow.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #35 –
Quote from: Lods – on
There is some seriously warped interpretations of what people are actually saying.
So far off the mark it's ridiculous.
Lost the plot completely.


I suspect some need a cup of tea, a Bex and a good lie down.

Saying Ollie may give us good service is nowhere near saying he's better than Charlie Curnow.

Its not about like for like though Lods. Its about what it gives to the team.
Charlie was a lone ranger.
Ollie is a team player.

If you asked chat GPT to rate these players based on what is said on these forums, it'd come to the same conclusion.....which would be opposite to the rest of the world.

I'm just highlighting that what is being said is also absurd.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #36 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: Lods – on
There is some seriously warped interpretations of what people are actually saying.
So far off the mark it's ridiculous.
Lost the plot completely.


I suspect some need a cup of tea, a Bex and a good lie down.

Saying Ollie may give us good service is nowhere near saying he's better than Charlie Curnow.

Its not about like for like though Lods. Its about what it gives to the team.
Charlie was a lone ranger.
Ollie is a team player.

If you asked chat GPT to rate these players based on what is said on these forums, it'd come to the same conclusion.....which would be opposite to the rest of the world.

I'm just highlighting that what is being said is also absurd.

Kruds, the slant that's being put on it is not what's being actually stated by posters.

No one would say that Ollie Florent could impact a game the way Charlie could...no-one!

The whole basis of these arguments is ..will the loss of the three key players mean our 2026 will be worse than our 2025.
Can we cover them, not necessarily like for like  but strengths in other areas.

Suggesting people are saying all the outs are duds and all the ins are champs...has been said by no-one... ever!

It's just 'extreme' language with no basis in fact.

We'll miss the players we've lost. But by this time next year I suspect we'll have an appreciation of what some of the new players can give us.


Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #37 –
@Lods....
And you think the opposing arguments are sticking to facts?

Have a look at Thrys take on 'my thoughts' on TDK vs Pittonet, even though i've made that abundandly clear over the past week.

But thats ok is it? Only when i do it??

Tit for tat.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #38 –
Quote from: kruddler – on

Defence wasn't really a concern?

Lets here a non-Carlton based perspective....
https://www.zerohanger.com/every-afl-teams-backline-ranked-1-18-171600/6/
Quote
13 - Carlton

Did the person who made that ranking actually watch any games or do any actual analysis?

The most basic and reliable assessment of a team's defence is points against and we ranked 9th in 2025.

"Negative waves are not helpful. Try saying something righteous and hopeful instead." Oddball

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #39 –
Quote from: DJC – on
Quote from: kruddler – on

Defence wasn't really a concern?

Lets here a non-Carlton based perspective....
https://www.zerohanger.com/every-afl-teams-backline-ranked-1-18-171600/6/

Did the person who made that ranking actually watch any games or do any actual analysis?

The most basic and reliable assessment of a team's defence is points against and we ranked 9th in 2025.

....and why would we drop?

.....because we got worse.....which is what i'm saying!
...and what the article is saying re Silvagni.
 

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #40 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
@Lods....
And you think the opposing arguments are sticking to facts?

Have a look at Thrys take on 'my thoughts' on TDK vs Pittonet, even though i've made that abundandly clear over the past week.

But thats ok is it? Only when i do it??

Tit for tat.

It's all about different opinions. Sometimes the things we write are misinterpreted. Sometimes
opinions change. It's often hard to keep up with where folks are at.
We get invested in an idea and off goes our head and on goes a pumpkin.

I actually have no idea how 2026 will go.
I'm prepared to wait and see, and after the last 25 years am resilient enough to know that if it goes pear shaped we have 2027 to look forward  to.

If you feel your position has been misrepresented by all means challenge it.

It's more the silly comments like those opposing think all the players out are duds and all the incomers are superstars.
No one thinks that. We've lost good players. We don't know how the new guys will go but we do have some idea of the way they play, their strengths and indeed their weaknesses.
What we don't know is whether they will enhance our 2026 side. One thing is sure.it will be a little different.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #41 –
People are sick of me challenging opinions as it is, turning every thread into the same discussion.
You'd be surprised how much i let go.

I said this as recently as 4 days ago, in a thread starting by Thry! But, he goes back to what i was saying 18 months ago.
https://www.carltonsc.com/index.php?topic=7438.msg458110#msg458110
Quote
re tdk...
A lot of people misunderstand me when it comes to him. Let me clarify.
1. I don't think he is worth the crazy money we offered him and certainly not what the saints offer him.
2. I think his ruckwork (hitouts) is average at best, pittonet destroys him in that area.
3. I think his around the ground work is good but far from elite. I did some comparisons to Pittonet in all the key areas tackles, clearances,  marks, disposals etc and they were very similar.
4. His consistency and his ability to stay out in the park is a weakness, see point 1.

That being said...
- His athletic ability is elite.
- His potential is elite.
- If it's 'his day' people can't stop him.
- I picked him as my starting ruck in all of the best 22s we did last year from preseason to the end.

So he is very much a loss. A lot of that loss is a loss on what he could be. Some of that is comparing to what we have instead, in not talking about Pittonet, but 2nd ruck... Reidy or HOK, who should also be a potential kpf we rely on.

The whole debate is very simple.
Players coming in are looked at with navy glasses
Players going out are seen without them.

That is misrepresenting players and thats the crux of the debate.....and why i took it to the n'th degree to highlight that fact.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #42 –
In any event, why have we only got 6 votes??
Come on people, please vote for best 5 on the bench to compliment the starting 18.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #43 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
People are sick of me challenging opinions as it is, turning every thread into the same discussion.
You'd be surprised how much i let go.

I said this as recently as 4 days ago, in a thread starting by Thry! But, he goes back to what i was saying 18 months ago.
https://www.carltonsc.com/index.php?topic=7438.msg458110#msg458110
Quote
re tdk...
A lot of people misunderstand me when it comes to him. Let me clarify.
1. I don't think he is worth the crazy money we offered him and certainly not what the saints offer him.
2. I think his ruckwork (hitouts) is average at best, pittonet destroys him in that area.
3. I think his around the ground work is good but far from elite. I did some comparisons to Pittonet in all the key areas tackles, clearances,  marks, disposals etc and they were very similar.
4. His consistency and his ability to stay out in the park is a weakness, see point 1.

That being said...
- His athletic ability is elite.
- His potential is elite.
- If it's 'his day' people can't stop him.
- I picked him as my starting ruck in all of the best 22s we did last year from preseason to the end.

So he is very much a loss. A lot of that loss is a loss on what he could be. Some of that is comparing to what we have instead, in not talking about Pittonet, but 2nd ruck... Reidy or HOK, who should also be a potential kpf we rely on.

The whole debate is very simple.
Players coming in are looked at with navy glasses
Players going out are seen without them.

That is misrepresenting players and thats the crux of the debate.....and why i took it to the n'th degree to highlight that fact.

I believe that's what you are seeing. But it's an opinion that's based on your own assessment and bias.
So when I look at it I see those talking the 'sky is falling' as looking at it through 'chicken little glasses'...and thats based on my own assessment and bias.
You struggle understanding my point of view, I struggle with your point of view.
We won't know who was right until this time next year.....maybe longer.