Just wondering what people think.

Is it better to have pick 1 and nothing else in the top 30 of the draft (i.e. Carlton) or picks 4, 14 and 21?

I appreciate that Carlton got Juda$ but that's now in the past.

Just wondering what people think.

Is it better to have pick 1 and nothing else in the top 30 of the draft (i.e. Carlton) or picks 4, 14 and 21?

I appreciate that Carlton got Juda$ but that's now in the past.

it depends. if we pick up a dud at pick 4, and kruiser turns into a champion, then obviously prefer carlton's position.

But, if we get Morton, then we could definitly be the winners. Morton could realistically have gone pick 1 this year, and could end up the best player in the draft in 2 years time.

So if our pick 4 turns out to be as good as pick1, then having pick 4 and 14 as well obviuosly makes us better off.

Pick One, while obviously a position of envy for other clubs, brings with it its own demons. Club and player in this position are spotlighted to get it right, and this can bring unnecessary pressure to bear on both. While the best junior player of the day may be chosen, many variables over a career will ultimately determine whether the choice was ultimately right.

Take the 2001 trio of Hodge, Ball and Judd, taken in that order. At the time, speculation raged over who should go first and it was agreed that any of the three could claim the number one spot. So six years down the track, how do they stack up?

Judd would appear to be the one, followed by Hodge, then Ball. Ball's career has been derailed by on-going groin/OP injury, forseeable at the time? I doubt it. Judd entered that draft on the back of two shoulder reconstructions and was something of a risk. Injury free till 2007, this year though for the first time he has also been severely restricted by a groin/OP injury that perhaps threatens a return to his former glory - time will tell. Hodge has probably been the most durable of the three and racks up 25-35 posessions every week and can play anywhere. Will he at the end of their respective careers be the anointed one?

They have always been the "big three" when assessing the worth of the various drafts but as good as that draft supposedly was, many of the rest of that Top 10 of 2001 have had chequered careers.

In many ways, we tend to value the picks taken further on in the draft as the one that "slipped through" or the "smokey" or "bargain basement get" when the homework done by the recruiting gurus comes to the fore.

Good player development, mentoring, injury, club culture, maturity, personal issues or lack of, luck etc etc, all also play a part in whether a player becomes a champion or not, as well as the natural talent displayed at junior levels which has clubs and supporters salivating - often prematurely.

So in answer to the question, I would rather have the extra picks in the Top 20, and rely on those at the club to develop them properly and wisely.

Plenty of champions have come from below Pick One.

it would be fair to say that carlton are in a great position in that they can get WHOEVER they want with the first pick while the demons are trying to take a guess at what will happen...however we have 3 first round draft picks for the first time so we could turn out lucky

Just wondering what people think.

Is it better to have pick 1 and nothing else in the top 30 of the draft (i.e. Carlton) or picks 4, 14 and 21?

I appreciate that Carlton got Juda$ but that's now in the past.

YOu cant ignore the fact that Carlton had picks 1, 3 and 20

SO you have to ask would you prefer pick 1 and Chris Judd, or picks 4, 14 and 21?

Just wondering what people think.

Is it better to have pick 1 and nothing else in the top 30 of the draft (i.e. Carlton) or picks 4, 14 and 21?

DEFINITELY the latter. 3 players in the top 21 could become stars. Look at Rivers who was taken in the teens, Brock who was taken lower than he should have been, if only by a pick or two... After they're recruited, whether they were pick 1 or pick 81 they all have the same opportunity to impress the club. Granted the tag of first round pick can elongate a dud player's career, but as we know recruiting is just so hit and miss. We have 3 bites at the first round cherry, they have 1. I'd take our position any day of the week, EVEN WITH our lack of genuine stars...

DEFINITELY the latter. 3 players in the top 21 could become stars. Look at Rivers who was taken in the teens, Brock who was taken lower than he should have been, if only by a pick or two... After they're recruited, whether they were pick 1 or pick 81 they all have the same opportunity to impress the club. Granted the tag of first round pick can elongate a dud player's career, but as we know recruiting is just so hit and miss. We have 3 bites at the first round cherry, they have 1. I'd take our position any day of the week, EVEN WITH our lack of genuine stars...

Slight correction, Rivers was actually taken with pick 26, just to enforce your point further.