Mitch Hallahan the new Josh Kennedy?

[Ordovician]

I can't believe you guys are serious. Hallahan is a good ordinary footballer.
He is not in the same league as Kennedy or Hodge. He may be a serviceable footballer at the GCS nothing more.

Agree entirely.

He may have had 26 possessions but he did so little with them he barely had any impact on the game whatsoever.

He is a real plodder with no lateral movement. He should have played in the 70's with plough. He has no place in modern fast transition footy.

I will be shocked if he gets more than 12 games this year at the suns.

 

[Roughies Boys]

What's Zac Webster like? Kicking skills?

 

[TheFourPillars]

Zacs been training hard still rough around the edges similar to poppy quick and good tackler second and 3rd efforts

 

[Roughies Boys]

Zacs been training hard still rough around the edges similar to poppy quick and good tackler second and 3rd efforts

So average by foot? Better than Simpkin

 

[TheFourPillars]

So average by foot? Better than Simpkin

hmmm haven't seen him under AFL pressure to say but under VFL pressure he is average.

 

[Mighty P]

I still believe we should've kept Hallahan, he'll be good for the Suns.

 

[Roughies Boys]

I still believe we should've kept Hallahan, he'll be good for the Suns.

Could have, but who wants to keep a player who has requested a trade. Hawthorn did good by Hallahan

 

[Big Hotdog]

Hallahan has moved on.

Shouldn't we?

 

[Procrastinator35]

Hallahan has moved on.

Shouldn't we?

THIS^^^^Times infinity.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Just wanted to add my 2c. Hawthorn seem to be pursuing faster outside types (who may also develop an inside game) - Smith, Hill, Hartung. O'Rourke, Langford when recruited, etc. Throughout Clarkson's reign, this is an area we have lacked and had to recruit for - whilst we have always had the slower, in and under types - Mitchell, Sewell, Lewis, Hodge, etc.

Coaching/recruting at Hawthorn seem to feel this is the way the game is headed and placed a preium on midfielders who also have good pace/endurance. I'm concerned that Hallahan was under appreciated as a result. Consider a few points:

1. Hallahan was recruited after a long pause by Hawthorn after he had suprisingly slid to our pick. Hawthorn appeared unsure despite him obviously being the most accomplished draftee left.

2. Other young mids debuted at AFL level ahead of him despite him being comfortably the the best performed of the lot at VFL level.

3. He started much better than others at AFL level but got less opportunities (including the now cemented Langford).

4. Hallahan was dropped after having 10 contested possies, 6 tackles and 3 clearances in his 6th game. The week before he had 20 possies, 7 tackles, 4 clearances and a goal. The week before he was even better (25 possies, 5 tackles, 6 clearances).

5. It was reported that after he said he wanted to stay at Hawthorn he was told frankly who he was behind in the fight for AFL opportunities, which included Woodward and O'Rourke (both of whom have shown (IMO far) less at this stage)

Hawthorn have gotten most things right the past few years so I will reserve any judgement and back them in on this one. However I've seen too many phases where athletes or athletic attributes are favoured over football smarts and contested ability. I'm concerned that we will feel his loss once Mitchell, Hodge, etc retire. I don't think he will be a superstar in the JPK mould but I do feel he will be a good inside player who kicks goals. We don't have many of those types going forward and may be exactly the type of player we need. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

[Thaihawk]

Let's be fare to our club. If you made a list of players we have gained, verses players we have let go, or lost (and you can include Judas) which list would you prefer. I'll go for Burgers, Gibbo, Hale, Jed etc. etc. Make your own decisions, but as far as I'm concerned we're travelling pretty well at the present.

In total one or two are going to look disappointing, but we are the family club, and if a player feels he is not good enough to get a game with us, but there are opportunities elsewhere, we won't stand in his way.

Just waiting for the tears over the coaches we have trained, only to pass them onto opposition clubs.

 

[cryptor]

Just wanted to add my 2c. Hawthorn seem to be pursuing faster outside types (who may also develop an inside game) - Smith, Hill, Hartung. O'Rourke, Langford when recruited, etc. Throughout Clarkson's reign, this is an area we have lacked and had to recruit for - whilst we have always had the slower, in and under types - Mitchell, Sewell, Lewis, Hodge, etc.

Coaching/recruting at Hawthorn seem to feel this is the way the game is headed and placed a preium on midfielders who also have good pace/endurance. I'm concerned that Hallahan was under appreciated as a result. Consider a few points:

1. Hallahan was recruited after a long pause by Hawthorn after he had suprisingly slid to our pick. Hawthorn appeared unsure despite him obviously being the most accomplished draftee left.

2. Other young mids debuted at AFL level ahead of him despite him being comfortably the the best performed of the lot at VFL level.

3. He started much better than others at AFL level but got less opportunities (including the now cemented Langford).

4. Hallahan was dropped after having 10 contested possies, 6 tackles and 3 clearances in his 6th game. The week before he had 20 possies, 7 tackles, 4 clearances and a goal. The week before he was even better (25 possies, 5 tackles, 6 clearances).

5. It was reported that after he said he wanted to stay at Hawthorn he was told frankly who he was behind in the fight for AFL opportunities, which included Woodward and O'Rourke (both of whom have shown (IMO far) less at this stage)

Hawthorn have gotten most things right the past few years so I will reserve any judgement and back them in on this one. However I've seen too many phases where athletes or athletic attributes are favoured over football smarts and contested ability. I'm concerned that we will feel his loss once Mitchell, Hodge, etc retire. I don't think he will be a superstar in the JPK mould but I do feel he will be a good inside player who kicks goals. We don't have many of those types going forward and may be exactly the type of player we need. Hopefully I'm wrong.

You make some good points but I don't know what the club really could have done though.

I think the pick up of Hardisty fills the gap Hallahan leaves. With the added benefit of Hardisty not expecting to play any substantial amount of footy at AFL level for at least a couple years. Hallahan may have really wanted to stay but I think he would've struggled to get a game at AFL level unless we had another really bad run with injury - and even then he'd now have Anderson, O'Rourke, Whitecross and a more developed Woodward to compete with for that spot.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Just waiting for the tears over the coaches we have trained, only to pass them onto opposition clubs.

The Davey Parkin retrospective Fred....I'll get right on it!.....3 Flags wasn't it? And the mosquito squadron from hell to torment us with.

 

[cs61]

2. Other young mids debuted at AFL level ahead of him despite him being comfortably the the best performed of the lot at VFL level.

3. He started much better than others at AFL level but got less opportunities (including the now cemented Langford).

4. Hallahan was dropped after having 10 contested possies, 6 tackles and 3 clearances in his 6th game. The week before he had 20 possies, 7 tackles, 4 clearances and a goal. The week before he was even better (25 possies, 5 tackles, 6 clearances).

5. It was reported that after he said he wanted to stay at Hawthorn he was told frankly who he was behind in the fight for AFL opportunities, which included Woodward and O'Rourke (both of whom have shown (IMO far) less at this stage)

Hawthorn have gotten most things right the past few years so I will reserve any judgement and back them in on this one. However I've seen too many phases where athletes or athletic attributes are favoured over football smarts and contested ability. I'm concerned that we will feel his loss once Mitchell, Hodge, etc retire. I don't think he will be a superstar in the JPK mould but I do feel he will be a good inside player who kicks goals. We don't have many of those types going forward and may be exactly the type of player we need. Hopefully I'm wrong.

I don't think the above happened for no reason though. Hawthorn really felt that he was lacking some attributes that would suit the modern game/our team. Especially when the AFL quality he provides is more than covered already in our team with our array of inside midfielders. For years we even had someone the quality of Lewis having to play hybrid roles in our team, even though he has already had the potential of playing as the starting inside midfielder. Then you have guys like Shiels who can play inside, run really well, and also mind an opposition player. It many games we often change the centre square combination at almost every bounce. Think of guys that run through there, Burgoyne, Rioli, Breust, Puopolo, Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, all capable of going to a flank afterwards and playing the role really well.

I would think the issue with Hallahan are that he might not have the ability to play multiple roles like many of the younger guys, and also his lack of pace on the spread.

We always think long term, in terms of playing guys we think have a chance of helping us win a premiership. It might look surprising when he's dominating Box Hill, we have injuries, and others are playing, but given how much we were looking for younger midfielders in recent years, it was by no accident that we looked in other areas before Hallahan. We felt he wasn't want we wanted for our mix.

It was hard to see how he fits in this year, given its already awkward to work out how Anderson, O'Rourke and Whitecross are even going to find a place. They would be ahead of Hallahan because they seem like types who can play a variety of roles on top of being able to run through the middle, rather than just inside where we are already extremely strong. They also have the potential to be in our very best 22, which I don't think I ever really thought Hallahan could push up in to our top 22-24 players.

I think going to Gold Coast makes perfect sense for all parties really, he gets a better opportunity to find spot, Gold Coast get a solid mature player/depth, and continue to roll over our list.

 

[Brishawk]

Just wanted to add my 2c. Hawthorn seem to be pursuing faster outside types (who may also develop an inside game) - Smith, Hill, Hartung. O'Rourke, Langford when recruited, etc. Throughout Clarkson's reign, this is an area we have lacked and had to recruit for - whilst we have always had the slower, in and under types - Mitchell, Sewell, Lewis, Hodge, etc.

Coaching/recruting at Hawthorn seem to feel this is the way the game is headed and placed a preium on midfielders who also have good pace/endurance. I'm concerned that Hallahan was under appreciated as a result. Consider a few points:

1. Hallahan was recruited after a long pause by Hawthorn after he had suprisingly slid to our pick. Hawthorn appeared unsure despite him obviously being the most accomplished draftee left.

Hawthorn have gotten most things right the past few years so I will reserve any judgement and back them in on this one. However I've seen too many phases where athletes or athletic attributes are favoured over football smarts and contested ability. I'm concerned that we will feel his loss once Mitchell, Hodge, etc retire. I don't think he will be a superstar in the JPK mould but I do feel he will be a good inside player who kicks goals. We don't have many of those types going forward and may be exactly the type of player we need. Hopefully I'm wrong.

On point 1 I am pretty sure we debated he and another player and eventually made the call on Hallahan (won't name the player in case I got my wires crossed).

His problem is pretty much as you described - endurance and agility. Even if his endurance improves he doesn't have the agility of a Mitchell or even Sewell back in the day. It means he is just going to get caught with the ball and be under constant pressure because he can't create time for himself with a shimmy or a side step. He has some great AFL attributes and I think he will be a solid player but I can see why he would not be getting many games in our curent line up. He just doesn't fit the mix of players we are trying to establish. Maybe he would after some others have retired but in reality he is fighting for a spot with Lewis for game style and role and Lewis is in our top few players these days so its mission impossible had he stayed. Good luck to him!

 

[Procrastinator35]

On point 1 I am pretty sure we debated he and another player and eventually made the call on Hallahan (won't name the player in case I got my wires crossed).
!

Luke Parker!

 

[Brishawk]

Luke Parker!

Well that is the name I heard and in hindsight we probably made a bad call haha

Mind you it seems like a too bad to be true situation so who knows if it is true.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Well that is the name I heard and in hindsight we probably made a bad call haha

Mind you it seems like a too bad to be true situation so who knows if it is true.

We made a bad call....Parker was the far superior player to Hallahan, as they both played for Dandy & blind freddy could see it.....Hallahan already had the foot issues prior to us drafting him, which held him back from having a full pre-season for his first 2 seasons with us....Terrible call if truth be told.

 

[Hawkas1988]

We made a bad call....Parker was the far superior player to Hallahan, as they both played for Dandy & blind freddy could see it.....Hallahan already had the foot issues prior to us drafting him, which held him back from having a full pre-season for his first 2 seasons with us....Terrible call if truth be told.

To be fair they were picks 38 and 39 or so. Many clubs missed out on Parker. If Parker was such a great youngster he would've gone a lot higher than where he was picked.

If the draft was done again now then no doubt he would be one of the first few picked.

 

[Procrastinator35]

To be fair they were picks 38 and 39 or so. Many clubs missed out on Parker. If Parker was such a great youngster he would've gone a lot higher than where he was picked.

If the draft was done again now then no doubt he would be one of the first few picked.

Most clubs were aware of Parker's talent & he was easily a top 10 pick in that draft....The issue was more to do with his attitude.

Most recruiters would not be surprised to see what Parker is doing now as he dominated each & every competition the same way, his entire junior career.

It was simply a good call/bad call scenario....The GUN was there to be had & we fudged....Simple as THAT & nothing to do with hindsight Hawkas1988 .

 

[Hawkas1988]

Most clubs were aware of Parker's talent & he was easily a top 10 pick in that draft....The issue was more to do with his attitude.

Most recruiters would not be surprised to see what Parker is doing now as he dominated each & every competition the same way, his entire junior career.

It was simply a good call/bad call scenario....The GUN was there to be had & we fudged....Simple as THAT & nothing to do with hindsight Hawkas1988 .

I don't disagree that we fudged it but still if he was a top 10 prospect and fell to 39 or 40 due to attitude then it's a little strange. There has been numerous examples of players with attitude issues that have still been taken top 15 or so or at the worst top 30 if they're that talented.

Many clubs clearly fudged it too if that was the case of him being judged top 10 on talent pre-draft.

I guess we can't be too upset, we get more right than wrong and can't complain

 

[Procrastinator35]

I don't disagree that we fudged it but still if he was a top 10 prospect and fell to 39 or 40 due to attitude then it's a little strange. There has been numerous examples of players with attitude issues that have still been taken top 15 or so or at the worst top 30 if they're that talented.

Many clubs clearly fudged it too if that was the case of him being judged top 10 on talent pre-draft.

I guess we can't be too upset, we get more right than wrong and can't complain

We took the same risk just recently with another top 10 talent in Garlett & it blew up in our faces....So yes, you win some you lose some!

In last year's draft Lamb was easily a top 10 talent, but his perceived 'issues' saw him slip to our first pick, but we opted for Howe instead & the Eagles then swooped!....I'm hoping our choice of Miles over Nelson also does not come back to bite us on the arse!

 

[Hawkas1988]

We took the same risk just recently with another top 10 talent in Garlett & it blew up in our faces....So yes, you win some you lose some!

In last year's draft Lamb was easily a top 10 talent, but his perceived 'issues' saw him slip to our first pick, but we opted for Howe instead & the Eagles then swooped!....I'm hoping our choice of Miles over Nelson also does not come back to bite us on the arse!

Yeh I must admit Lamb has surprised me in the nab games so far, I really didn't want us to draft him but he looks better than what I thought. Very early though and Howe excites me anyway.

 

[Thaihawk]

Just remember, in hindsight, it's easy to be right, and criticize errors others made.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Just remember, in hindsight, it's easy to be right, and criticize errors others made.

True....But in this case I near fell off the couch when they called Hallahan instead of Parker....It was a clear 'blue' Thaihawk.

I've been following the juniors since before the days when Hodge & Sammy were drafted....We looked a gift horse in the mouth with this one!