Why is pick one so untouchable?
So Chris Judd has chosen Carlton. They should feel so privileged that after a week of virtual prostitution, he has plucked the Blues out of the line up, like a businessman at a city hideaway on a Friday Night.
For a sport which prides itself on history and club spirit, this process has been so clinical. So detached.
Thank goodness Carlton’s training facilities are up to scratch.
Now comes the actual trade. The Blues are adamant they won’t be giving up their number one pick. Understandable, given they worked so hard to earn it, losing 11 straight matches while looking like they were trying to win.
If the Blues can secure Judd without offloading pick one, good luck to them, but it raises the question of whether the importance of the draft grossly overplayed.
Judd is the number one player in the game, unquestioned. Matthew Kreuzer, the top draft pick in waiting, is a kid who killed them in the under 18s.
Big difference.
Kreuzer may well live up to the hype. He may go on to be an irrepressible force, however if we acknowledge Judd’s standing, then at best, Kreuzer can only be as good as Judd, because the 2004 Brownlow Medalist is at the very top.
Kruezer hasn’t played with men, hasn’t been put under the intense spotlight that comes with being an AFL. Why is he a certainly to be a 300 game smash hit?
The point is this: If it got down to picking the bona fide number one player in the game, or a kid who may get there one day, surely it’s a no brainer.
Clive Waterhouse, Michael Gardiner, Des Headland, Brendon Goddard. Good players, perhaps very good. Their link? All number one picks of the past.
Would you trade Chris Judd for any of those players? No way.
The number one pick is not always a guarantee of immortality.
Subscribe to The Serve by Email
No comments yet.