View Full Version : Risk Assesment
Hodge over Judd. Looking like not a bad decision.
Franklin. Despite worries about attitude, whatever, you guys have come up trumps.
And the decision that made me think of all this: Beau Muston.
The Pies passed on Muston, thinking it was too risky. Instead they draft Danny Stanley, thinking he is a sure bet, and could play 200 games for the club. That is not looking so likely.
All in all, I think you guys have done great with the risk assesments.
Good job Hawkers. :thumbsu:
Unfortunatly Beau has gone down again. I am not yet ready to concede hodge over Judd. Juddy will be back.
Noel Gallagher
4 Mar 2008, 14:46
All in all I believe that the decision to take Hodge infront of Judd has paid off and as fans we are more than happy with our decision. Who would have thought that it may be judd's OP rather than his shoulders that may cut his career short whilst Hodge was the one who originally had OP!
Having said that I genuinely believe that after the Judd/Hodge draft the Hawthorn recruiting department decided to draft players on their ability and not weigh too haevilly on the injuries they brought with them (within reason of course)
Hence the decion to take Dowler at #6 (widely recognised as the best KPP of the draft), Muston as mentioned, Jordon Lewis whilst fully recovered suffered a broken leg in his junior days hence the reason he may have slipped a little, and even Rioli came severly underdone due to ongoing injuries last year.
Hawkers Hero
4 Mar 2008, 14:47
The jury is out on all 3 really.
1. If Judd never gets back to his best and Hodge continues to improve then youd probably call it even.
2. If you believe the rumors then Franklin is playing well in spite of his attitude and may well sucumb to it in the future.
3. Muston just done his knee again and hasnt played since being drafted - not doing any better than Stanley if you ask me.
Personally I think at least 2 out of 3 will end up being good calls with Franklin to mature and get even better, and Hodge to surpass Judd (I hope Judd recovers fully but I doubt it).
Unfortunately, I have significant doubts surrounding Muston's chances to come back again which is a real shame because he would be an absolute gun if he can get back.
Carn Hawkas
4 Mar 2008, 14:51
Noone here thinks we should have taken Judd instead. I'm glad we have Hodge, he is my favourate player and a lot of other people hears favourate player as well.
What about Dowler instead of Ryder?
Now there's a risk that will never pay off!
Yeah I knew Muston has injured his knee again, but I would still rather have taken a chance with him than be stuck with a player like Stanley on my list. They didn't know that at the time, but I'm just saying that I think it was worth the risk, as Stanley will probably never do much for us.
At this stage, I think it was a good decision to draft Hodgey. He has really injected some mongrel into your side, and I think he is just a fantastic bloke on the field.
I know you guys have probably gone over these issues a hundred times, I just wanted to pop in a say well done, as your risks at this stage have paid off IMHO.
Would you guys take a 40/60 risk on a fantastic player with injury worries, or rather a 80/20 risk on a player that is not as good? You took both paths, one with Hodge, the other with Muston. Judd has significant injury problems still, and Stanley really hasn't done anything.
Luck? Maybe a little, but still good choices I reckon.
Yeah I knew Muston has injured his knee again, but I would still rather have taken a chance with him than be stuck with a player like Stanley on my list. They didn't know that at the time, but I'm just saying that I think it was worth the risk, as Stanley will probably never do much for us.
At this stage, I think it was a good decision to draft Hodgey. He has really injected some mongrel into your side, and I think he is just a fantastic bloke on the field.
I know you guys have probably gone over these issues a hundred times, I just wanted to pop in a say well done, as your risks at this stage have paid off IMHO.
Would you guys take a 40/60 risk on a fantastic player with injury worries, or rather a 80/20 risk on a player that is not as good? You took both paths, one with Hodge, the other with Muston. Judd has significant injury problems still, and Stanley really hasn't done anything.
Luck? Maybe a little, but still good choices I reckon.
We had a truck load of picks in 2005 and I guess that influenced the decision to gamble a bit. But as you say, the safe option isn't always any good either, although I dont know much about Stanley.
kirbatron
4 Mar 2008, 15:24
Skeetz your invited to my Hawthorn Tea parties anytime.
You guys just need to look at the 05 draft and hold your heads high.
WeneedyoungJarmans
4 Mar 2008, 15:29
Hodge over Judd. Looking like not a bad decision.
Franklin. Despite worries about attitude, whatever, you guys have come up trumps.
And the decision that made me think of all this: Beau Muston.
The Pies passed on Muston, thinking it was too risky. Instead they draft Danny Stanley, thinking he is a sure bet, and could play 200 games for the club. That is not looking so likely.
All in all, I think you guys have done great with the risk assesments.
Good job Hawkers. :thumbsu:
Either you are taking the *iss here, or an imposter presenting themselves as a Pies supporter, when clearly you possess an informed view on football matters, including list management. Perhaps you are a Pies supporter but you stole those comments from someone else! ;)
FisherHawk
4 Mar 2008, 15:33
Hodge over Judd. Looking like not a bad decision.
All in all, I think you guys have done great with the risk assesments.
Good job Hawkers. :thumbsu:
Thanks skeetz.
Looks like a great decision to me.
Without doubt, season 2008, I honestly want Hodge over Judd. I'm not saying Judd has run his race, as he will remain one of the superior players of the comp, baring injury for a long time. One of the greatest careers to his age of all time.
It's just that Hodgey is only getting better. For me, Hodge is better by foot, handles himself better with disposal under pressure, can tackle harder, and is a better defensive player, and can swing straight back to attack. He also has fantastic on field leadership.
It seemed like only last season, that the rest of the competition had finally caught up to how good this guy really is:thumbsu:.
Risk Assessment?
Hodge over Judd - Took the safer bet but 50/50 as to whether or not it was the right call. While Judd is definately the better player Judd's injuries appear to be at a time when we're looking to launch and he would never have gotten us a premiership as he got/assisted West Coast
Franklin over Tambling - Took the higher risk bet as Franklin did have attitude questions and had a terrible TAC cup I think :s. Tambling has great work ethic, skills and speed so no-one would've faulted Hawthorn in hindsight for taking him
Muston over Stanely - Took the higher risk and you would say have failed. Does that mean the risk wasn't worth it? Of course not or we wouldn't have taken it.
Either you are taking the *iss here, or an imposter presenting themselves as a Pies supporter, when clearly you possess an informed view on football matters, including list management. Perhaps you are a Pies supporter but you stole those comments from someone else! ;)
ha.
I don't see anything wrong with complimenting another team, although I do almost choke when the scum do anything remotely compliment-worthy. Thankfully that's not very often.
Truth is, I was born is '83. Most of my mates are Hawkers. I also went to school with a bloke who played (a couple of games) for you guys. Although I like almost nothing more in football than beating the brown and gold, I do also want you to do well, and have some great battles with us. And I do think I can recognise a good player/coach/footy department, no matter the colours.
Love-in over,
Cheers guys.
Why do you guys blow wind up Judds ass like the rest of them. He is the most Overrated player i think i have ever seen. The reason Judd is rated SO highly is because his style of playing (Bursting through packs, using his pace) Is very flashy and alot more exciting and noticable then alot of others. Dont get me wrong, Judd is a top player, one of the best in the comp no doubt, But in terms of a FOOTBALLER, Hodge is better. Cant believe no one sees this. he is tougher, has an equally good footy brain, Is a better kick, is a better mark and can play anywhere.
Ask this question... Put Hodge in the middle of a WC midfield in 05, 06. Getting taps from cox supported by Kerr and Cous. could he win a brownlow and a norm smith? Damn straight he could.
Carn Hawkas
4 Mar 2008, 17:13
What about Dowler instead of Ryder?
Now there's a risk that will never pay off!
What about Tambling and Deledio instead of Franklin?
Now there's a risk that will never pay off!
HawkXNtric
4 Mar 2008, 20:04
When will people get it right???
The surprise at the time was that we picked Hodge over Ball - not Judd....
Ball was widely tipped to be the number 1 draft pick that year.
Agree that we only took the Muston risk because we had a number of early draft picks that year.
The focus will now turn to our 'successive number 6 picks', Dowler & Thorp. Expect the axes to come out should both players not be 70-goal forwards by season's end...;)
flukeyluke
4 Mar 2008, 20:58
Hodge over Judd. Looking like not a bad decision.
Franklin. Despite worries about attitude, whatever, you guys have come up trumps.
And the decision that made me think of all this: Beau Muston.
The Pies passed on Muston, thinking it was too risky. Instead they draft Danny Stanley, thinking he is a sure bet, and could play 200 games for the club. That is not looking so likely.
All in all, I think you guys have done great with the risk assesments.
Good job Hawkers. :thumbsu:
Good work mate. Drop in anytime:thumbsu:
I think collectively we think the club has done pretty well too.