View Full Version : Hodge v Hayes
Eel_storm
17 Apr 2008, 14:31
Yup.
vinnie_vegas69
17 Apr 2008, 14:38
Hayes... Just...
Both are pretty much equal in terms of their range of attributes.
Hodge is a better kick, and Hayes goes in a little harder, and tackles slightly better. That's not to say Hayes isn't a terrific kick, or that Hodge isn't hard as nails, but it's the slight edge between the two of them.
I think if I was going to have to watch one run around for my side, I think I'd probably like Hayes more - Never takes a backwards step in the way he plays the game, yet isn't even close to being a dirty player.
Both Stars. But I would take Hayes purely because of the way he goes into get the hard ball.
He is #1 in Clearances this year and also up there in Tackles.
His Tackling is 1st Class.
Johnny_Segment
17 Apr 2008, 17:13
I wold take Hodge any day of the week purely on his ability to turn a game. The final against the crows last year will always be remembered for Buddy's goals but if you ask Hawthorn supporters, 9/10 will say we won it becasue of Hodge. He was on one leg and he was the one who got us back into the contest.
Power King
17 Apr 2008, 17:18
saints fan says hayes, hawks fan hodge... of course you watch em closer than supporters of other teams
this is a pretty good match up for a poll... very very even, i can't even split them, both have good attributes in terms of skills, hardness, leadership etc
i'll go for hayes because of more finals experience
Carn Hawkas
17 Apr 2008, 17:33
Hodge
I have seen Hodgey play a lot more than Hayes.
He is probably our most important player. His leadership, hardness, ability to turn a game.
TBoyleSuperstar
17 Apr 2008, 17:42
Rate both very very highly and would be very close. Hodge due to his ability to play forward, back and in the middle, whereas Hayes is more of just an out and out midfielder. Both tough as nails, both hard at the footy, love the fact that Hodgey is at Hawthorn, could handle having lenny there too.
TRAVCLOKE#32
17 Apr 2008, 18:37
Luke Hodge by the proverbial mile!
TheBigUnit
17 Apr 2008, 19:00
Luke Hodge. More versatile (can play as a rebounding flanker, inside mid or small forward), more dynamic, better disposal and comes off as having a better leadership attributes. Hayes is a better 'traditional' inside mid that lays tackles and wins the contested ball/clearances to gives off to the outside players, but Hodge is more than that.
Hayes.
Nope, I'm not biased at all. :D
Probs Hodge, cos he's younger. But thats about it, but both teams would be happy with who they've got.
Lynch takes a mark
17 Apr 2008, 19:24
Hodge by a long, LONG way
vinnie_vegas69
17 Apr 2008, 19:58
I don't see how anyone can argue that there's much difference in it, regardless of how they're voting.
I don't see how anyone can argue that there's much difference in it, regardless of how they're voting.
Nobody with both eyes open could.
Imagine how good it would be to have both in the same side.
Hayes, just for me.
One Eyed Sainter 66
17 Apr 2008, 20:35
To all the people saying "Hodge by forever" and so on, care to elaborate?
TassieSaint
17 Apr 2008, 20:41
Hodge by a long, LONG way
Got to be joking. If you think Hodge, fair enough he's a gun, but there is no way there is that much between them. For me, Hayes but not by much.
Hodge's footskills and his goalkicking ability would just shade Hayes. Both are very hard at the ball, Hayes is a better tackler and in the clearances... Not much very much between them, I chose Hodge probably because of his age. Would love both at North.
Dippers_Mullet
17 Apr 2008, 21:16
Great players, love them both.
Hodge, because he's hard as nails, is our on field leader and all class. Then again so is Hayes.
Hayes in phenominal in and around the packs, but is more a player that keeps the ball moving, and helps players (Dal Santo) win the Saints games. Hodge wins games.
Dippers_Mullet
17 Apr 2008, 21:17
Just out of interest when/where was Hayes drafted?
TRAVCLOKE#32
17 Apr 2008, 21:32
Draft History – Lenny Hayes
1998 National AFL Draft 1st round selection (St Kilda) No. 11 overall.
Recruited From: Pennant Hills / NSW/ACT Rams
lamaros
17 Apr 2008, 21:35
Hayes, but I had to think about it. Rare for a BigFooty poll.
As a Doggies supporter who has seen both of them dominate games against us, I would say Hayes over a longer period time but if I had to pick someone to IMPROVE our side NOW, it would be Hodge. Kicks goals, bigger, better mark, more damaging kick, more pace, more BULLDOG style. Not to disrespect Hayes and all the one percenters he brings at all, he's killed us for several years but at present and in the future, I'd say Hodge. ( I'll keep Griffen and see how he stacks up in a couple of years against both of them though)
Didn't think this would be as close as it is, I know Hayes is a gun, but harder at it than Hodge according to some here? Going to make sure I catch the Saints game this week and pay closer attention to him. Looking forward to it. :thumbsu: Haven't voted by the way.
(Just realised they're playing Essendon, that's not really going to be a great indication of hardness at the ball is it? Ah well, I'll watch anyway).
what a joke of a thread luke hodge shits all over lenny hayes , lenny hayes would not make any other teams top five apart from st kilda and maybe melbourne at the moment the proof will be tonight when he gets beaten by bashir houli (sorry about spelling )
MinerBoy
18 Apr 2008, 10:49
Hodge is the better kick, mark, goal kicker etc and also goes extremely hard. Hayes is being talked about in terms of his inside work and tackling and rightly so. However, Hodge has everything Hayes has and so much more. Hayes is a one dimensional type player ( and a very good one) whereas Hodge is far more versatile in the roles he can perform and is more instrumental in influencing the result of games.
hodge = gun
18 Apr 2008, 10:58
Hodge players come along 1 in 1000, can literally play any position on the ground except ruck, has beautiful skills, great overhead, tough as they come. The defining moment in hodge's career will always be his courage in coming back in the (elimination final) from what looked like a serious knee injury to get back on and lead the boys to a famous victory was truly inspirational! I dont doubt hayes' ability very good player but he's not in Hodge's class.
HODGEYROAD
18 Apr 2008, 11:20
Both are hard as nails but the difference is Hodge has a better kick,overhead mark kicks more goals which = More of a match winner. Not to mention Luke Hodge is only 23. Lenny Hayes is a good player were as Hodge is abut a level or 2 up.
I don't know why this is even a discussion.
Hodge is better in every facet of the game. An absolute gun who uses it well, gets his own footy, tough, leads by example, quick, smart, good body on body.
Hayes is a better than average midfield plodder.
What a joke that this is even a thread.
dipper86
18 Apr 2008, 12:34
what a joke of a thread luke hodge shits all over lenny hayes , lenny hayes would not make any other teams top five apart from st kilda and maybe melbourne at the moment the proof will be tonight when he gets beaten by bashir houli (sorry about spelling )
Ease up! I have no idea how people can rubbish a very good and consistent player in Lenny Hayes, Both players are great in there own right its just that I think Hodges strengths, his versatility and his ability to turn a game outweigh Hayes's strengths.
Hodge just.
Hayes was in Brownlow medal form 3 years ago before doing his ACL, he hasn't quite got back to that level but is still a star some people are criminally underrating Hayes.
Hayes was in Brownlow medal form 3 years ago before doing his ACL, he hasn't quite got back to that level but is still a star some people are criminally underrating Hayes.
Good post, spot on.
tw0kbydesign
18 Apr 2008, 15:25
Hayes for me. Would love him in North's midfield...
Hawkie_McHawkHawk
18 Apr 2008, 19:58
Honestly don't think im biased, but IMO Luke Hodge is clearly the better player. To be fair havent seen much of Hayes this season, and I am a Hawthorn supporter so my vote is redundant.
Got to be joking. If you think Hodge, fair enough he's a gun, but there is no way there is that much between them. For me, Hayes but not by much.
Hayes is a gun, well and truly you're best midfielder. Hodge is better, by a little bit, I wouldn't say 'just', he's better by more than that.
Dal Santo and Ball are the ones he shits all over:)
BABYBOMBERS2007
18 Apr 2008, 21:29
Hodge is clearly better. Hodge is one of the best players in the AFL while Hayes isn't.
dipper86
18 Apr 2008, 23:57
Wow, watched Hayes closely again tonight, he's an utter gun in his own right.
SIR SAINT HOTDOG
19 Apr 2008, 00:18
Once again dominated in the contested possessions, clearances and tackles. Never gives up Lenny:thumbsu:
Main Man
19 Apr 2008, 00:27
Hayes... Just...
Both are pretty much equal in terms of their range of attributes.
Hodge is a better kick, and Hayes goes in a little harder, and tackles slightly better. That's not to say Hayes isn't a terrific kick, or that Hodge isn't hard as nails, but it's the slight edge between the two of them.
I think if I was going to have to watch one run around for my side, I think I'd probably like Hayes more - Never takes a backwards step in the way he plays the game, yet isn't even close to being a dirty player.
You have lost the plot mate, Hayes harder than Hodge, I have heard everything now!
Just a lazy 25 touches for Hayes tonight (12 Contested), 12 Tackles :eek:, 7 Clearances..
Lets see what Hodgey Podgey does Tomorrow.
vinnie_vegas69
19 Apr 2008, 09:40
You have lost the plot mate, Hayes harder than Hodge, I have heard everything now!
Did I not say that Hodge was as hard as nails?
I know Hodge is unbelievably hard, but Lenny Hayes picks up more clearances, more first possessions, more contested possessions and more tackles than Hodge.
Not by a wide margin, but he still does. As I said, it was near impossible to split them, but when you have two players, one has to be harder than the other, and Lenny Hayes is, IMO, the hardest midfielder in the competition.
tazhawk
19 Apr 2008, 09:51
Hodge is clearly better. Hodge is one of the best players in the AFL while Hayes isn't.
Spot on. :thumbsu:
bigbol069
19 Apr 2008, 10:27
Did I not say that Hodge was as hard as nails?
I know Hodge is unbelievably hard, but Lenny Hayes picks up more clearances, more first possessions, more contested possessions and more tackles than Hodge.
Not by a wide margin, but he still does. As I said, it was near impossible to split them, but when you have two players, one has to be harder than the other, and Lenny Hayes is, IMO, the hardest midfielder in the competition.
Entitled to your opinion and yeah Hayes is pretty tough, tougher than most and blessed with good skills too. But in my opinion you need to watch more of Hodge. Tougher and harder more often. Hodge is a proven match-winner through both toughness and skills. Hayes, well... is not so much. As far as who perceives Hodge as the better player, the poll, at the moment says 3 out of 4 people do, which I reckon is a fair indication of how much better Hodge actually is.
Schmick
19 Apr 2008, 11:00
Hayes is underated, but Hodge IMO still a fraction better.
vinnie_vegas69
19 Apr 2008, 11:41
As far as who perceives Hodge as the better player, the poll, at the moment says 3 out of 4 people do, which I reckon is a fair indication of how much better Hodge actually is.
Yep - I would have banked that 3 out of 4 would consider Hodge a better player, but he's always had a significantly higher profile than Hayes. That doesn't mean that he's better by any significant margin, or even better at all - It just means that people think he is.
I would suggest that if Luke Ball was playing exactly the same footy as Lenny Hayes, this poll would be just about dead even, because Ball has a high profile like Hodge, and they were drafted #1 and #2. People just don't talk about Lenny Hayes.
And that's not to take anything away from Luke Hodge - He is one of my favourite players in the competition, without any doubt.
I think this poll just proves the difference between someone being rated, and underrated.
mad-saint-guy
19 Apr 2008, 11:48
Don't forget that Lenny is still improving after his knee reco. In 2006 he was averaging 25 touches and earned 8 Brownlow votes in 9 games. He gradually got better last year and is now just getting back into some top form. Currently averaging 23.4 touches and 8.2 tackles and I believe he is leading the competition for clearances.
Hayes has it over Hodge for inside work (clearances, tackles, shepards) and Hodge has the advantage when it comes to long kicking, versatility and overhead marking. Some teams would be better off with Hayes, some better off with Hodge.
Lennys a gun but Hodge is still that bit better.
kolchak
19 Apr 2008, 12:55
Wait for a game when Al puts Hodge in the middle for the game, then say he can't get clearances better than Hayes.
Magpie Magic
19 Apr 2008, 13:01
I reckon it's actually pretty close. Hodge is more versatile and better with disposal. But Lenny is a better tackler and clearance player. They're both guns and as tough as nails, but I'd probably take Hodge just.
Jeremias
19 Apr 2008, 13:22
Both players are absolute guns and I wouldn't complain with either of them to be honest :D
A very close poll and a very good question.
I would have to say Hodge, but only JUST. Lenny is a brilliant inside, tough player, and Hodge is too. However, Hodge can turn a game just like that with some individual brilliance and can play pretty much anywhere on the ground to great effect, which Lenny can not.
Simon_Nesbit
19 Apr 2008, 13:34
A truly interesting comparison.
My first thought was Hodge. To be honest the second was "duh, bigfooty".
But then I thought about why - especially watching the game last night. Admittedly Bombers defense in midfield is non-existant, but Hayes seemed (in the patches I watched anyway) to be controlling the midfield, much in the way Hodge does.
I'd argue Hodge is the better player, more versatile, better kick, better handball, more intimidating, more physical, better mark, 'smarter' player, etc, etc - as he does all those things amazingly well.
But it's all by such a tiny percentage that in retrospect, it is actualyl a bloody hard choice.
Watching the game last night, Hayes reminded me of two other Hawthorn players - Sewell (when no Mitchell, and not tagging), and Mitchell (circa 04/05 when he WAS our midfield). Considering those are the blokes that pretty much won our B&F's those years, that's pretty high praise.
So I'm going to vote Hodge, but it's a hell of a lot closer than my first thoughts. How old is Hayes now? He'd be 25/26 now? A couple of years older anyway, though both are probably at/close to their peak.
Simon_Nesbit
19 Apr 2008, 13:35
jeezus. just looked at the results. Do people not watch the game?
Hodge is 4 years younger than Hayes and has many more years ahead of him so he would be the bigger asset for a club at this time.
Looking at pure ability and performance alone they are pretty much line ball. Hayes has leadership type qualities the way he goes about it and Hodge is deadly in the middle.
Eel_storm
20 Apr 2008, 17:19
Hodge is full of potential but he doesn't deliver, especially at the start of each season . . . at least that means he'll be primed for finals i guess.
hawks_legends
20 Apr 2008, 17:31
Hodgey.
Eel_storm
21 Apr 2008, 13:31
might be time to make hodge a permanent RHF . . . just not getting the ball as a midfielder.
Kid rock
21 Apr 2008, 18:25
hayes for mine. dont get me wrong i think hodge is a very good player but the difference between the two is one is overhyped. hodge has the whole number 1 draft pick in the superdraft tag while hayes only has his on field performances, in my opinion he is superior to hodge thus far.
Simon_Nesbit
21 Apr 2008, 18:40
Hodge's problem is also the Hawks achilles last few years.
With Mitchell, Lewis, Hodge, Sewell in the middle - whilst a great ball-winning combo - they are (06+ Sewell aside) all only average speed. To counter this, some have to play other roles than that they are ideal to. Sewell tags, Lewis and Hodge play forward, Hodge plays back, Lewis plays the running winger role. Even Mitchell spends as much time out of the prime ball-winning role as in it these days.
Whilst he would possibly be the best player as the #1 midfielder, he is best suited at the hawks as the 4th/5th forward/resting midfielder role - similar in a way to Hird I guess. So versatile, and in retrospect it has hurt his career (at least in the portrayal in the media) due to filling multiple roles, often within the one game.