Would we consider taking Alan Didak for our number 1 pick this year?

[lickmerocks]

Would we consider taking Didak for our number 1 pick this year?

Lets say after all the prioritys are out of the way we would be picking somewhere in the vicinty of 14-20 with our first pick?

At 25 he is a very smart player and would be good for 35 goals as a crumber on our forward line and also sets up goals with excellent vision.

I would think the Pies would consider this as i believe he was almost gone mid season and will be looked at at seasons end by the pies.

Would like your thoughts?

 

[Hawkers Hero]

Re: Didak?

Tough Call

On one hand he is a gun and the Hawks are in desperate need of a crumbing forward at the feet of Buddy and Roughie. He is only 25 as you say and therefore fits into our youth policy at the club. He also brings finals (even Grand Final) experience into the team which will be priceless in coming years.

Furthermore we really dont need the draft pick this year (alot of our picks still to play, weak draft etc) and picking up an established player would probably be preferable (I think Clarko mentioned something like this earlier in the season)

However, there is no arguing the fact that he is a bit of a tosser and could bring disruption to the club (and dare I say we really dont need any more ).

Also despite his brilliance he is alot like stevie johnson (before this year) and nick davis in that he is known for going missing in alot of games.

Having said all that, I think he may be worth the risk (presuming he is available which I doubt) as a change of clubs may suit him (away from that collingwood rabble and the associated pressure) and he would give the club that X-Factor - along with Buddy's contribution) that clubs need to be successful.

Theres my thought - feel free to rip into me now

 

[CAPTAINCRAWF]

Re: Would we consider Alan Didak in the draft?

Buddy, Roughy, Boyle, Williams and Didak. Holy ..... , you would swap seats at the end of every quarter and follow them from end to end wouldnt you? Salary cap may start to be a concern in the not to distant future though if we keep developing these quality players!

 

[Hawkers Hero]

Re: Would we consider Alan Didak in the draft?

Buddy, Roughy, Boyle, Williams and Didak. Holy ..... , you would swap seats at the end of every quarter and follow them from end to end wouldnt you? Salary cap may start to be a concern in the not to distant future though if we keep developing these quality players!

I think we are actually only at about 75% at the moment, we are going to need it when buddy and roughie come out of contract

 

[jbomb3000]

Short answer. Yes.

 

[hawkslore]

Re: Didak?

IMO I dont believe we need a crumber as badly as thought by alot of other supporters!
With Willo, Ossie, Hodgey and players like Moss even Changa and Crawf, we have enough players who can fill the crumbing role and giving up a first round draft pick for a player like Didak would be a waste! Maybe second round if he could prove his worthiness and eager to conform to the hawthorn way! But IMO i believe we should add more midfield pace or a FULLBACK should be the aim!

 

[kirbatron]

no doubt there are some things on a personal level the club would need to sort out with Alan, however if he was happy to come and put in the effort and training to get himself fit for 2008, we'd be laughing if we could get him for pick 1, only if the guys thought that with our first round there wouldn't be a suitable KP Backman to be developed...

 

[mulhollanddrive]

For pick 14 yes. Would they accept that, no.

Port will offer their first pick plus a good player.

 

[RustyHawk]

Lets wait till a certain court case has been completed and what info comes out before even thinking of making a case for this particular person.

people can leave their fingerprints all over various items including the ones they later regret having even touched.

 

[Bennycoff]

What about Williams? Don't see the point in getting Didak if we've got Williams fully fit and firing.

 

[Roughie]

For pick 14 yes. Would they accept that, no.

Port will offer their first pick plus a good player.

Surely Port have good enough small forwards in the Mot-Chop, Ebert, Rodan, and then throw in a rotating Pearce or Burgoyne?

Do I like Didak? **** No
Do I want Hawks to chase him? **** No
Will I pump him up if we got him? **** yeah

 

[Roughie]

What about Williams? Don't see the point in getting Didak if we've got Williams fully fit and firing.

I think maybe because there are some question marks about his knee because it is a degenerative injury, he could either come back in the manner Mcleod has and dealt with it, or its an injury that could hurt his footballing future.

 

[phillm1]

no !

 

[Parse]

Re: Would we consider Alan Didak in the draft?

I think we are actually only at about 75% at the moment, we are going to need it when buddy and roughie come out of contract

all clubs must pay minimum 92%

 

[fishbowl]

We should swap him for Thurgood.

 

[Hawkers Hero]

What about Williams? Don't see the point in getting Didak if we've got Williams fully fit and firing.

The only problem with willo (other than his knee) is that he doesn't play like a crumbing forward but more like a dixon (who he will probably replace).

In my opinion we need a crumbing forward like a davey, didak, steve johnson etc. to complement our forward line especially in the wet when we drop marks.

 

[jaydub]

What about Williams? Don't see the point in getting Didak if we've got Williams fully fit and firing.

I don't rate Williams as a cumber at all but rate him super highly for evrything else. I'd love to do this trade next year. I don't feel that we will do that well next year as it will be a bit of 2nd year bluesdue to all our youth they could get over confident. But by getting a bit more experience, and finals experince, i rekon we'd win next years gf. So yes to Didak for pick 14 or so and i reckon the pies might do it, they might ven ask for one of our ruckman aswell.
Didak and ????for Taylor(just a guess probably contracted) and pick 14?

 

[Mango_11]

The only problem with willo (other than his knee) is that he doesn't play like a crumbing forward but more like a dixon (who he will probably replace).

In my opinion we need a crumbing forward like a davey, didak, steve johnson etc. to complement our forward line especially in the wet when we drop marks.

I don't think we urgently need a crumber. A lot of clubs don't have an official player that takes that role. We have Osborne, Williams who do that job fairly well. A bunch of midfielders like Mcglynn, Bateman and even Sewell who have been able to 'crumb' goals. And finally we have tall forwards - Franklin, Roughead and Boyle who for their size have awesome ground skills with good hands!!

On the topic. Collingwood will be asking too much for what he's worth to us! Our salary cap is shrinking quickly! This is all rumour anyway, the chances of this happening are minimal.

 

[Bill Lawry. Mr. Classy]

Re: Didak?

IMO I dont believe we need a crumber as badly as thought by alot of other supporters!
With Willo, Ossie, Hodgey and players like Moss even Changa and Crawf, we have enough players who can fill the crumbing role and giving up a first round draft pick for a player like Didak would be a waste! Maybe second round if he could prove his worthiness and eager to conform to the hawthorn way! But IMO i believe we should add more midfield pace or a FULLBACK should be the aim!

Stephen Gilham?

 

[hodgehighway]

We do have a crumbing forward, his name is Buddy Frankilin and he stands at the perfect crumbing height of 196 cms

 

[Cosmo Kramer]

Take it in a heartbeat, collingwood wouldnt go for that though, pick 14 for didak thats an awful deal for them.

 

[Jabso]

We are not looking to offload him, it is not a Chris Tarrant situation. If he is looking to leave he would go to SA you would think. And lastly it would take more than a low 1st rounder than that.

Didak is much much more valuable than Tarrant and we got pick 8 and a solid player in Medhurst for him.

Didak would add a hell of a lot to any team. He plays completely different to Williams, and would complement him with superb passes rather than get in his way.

 

[thatswhatimtalkinabout]

Re: Didak?

IMO I dont believe we need a crumber as badly as thought by alot of other supporters!
With Willo, Ossie, Hodgey and players like Moss even Changa and Crawf, we have enough players who can fill the crumbing role and giving up a first round draft pick for a player like Didak would be a waste! Maybe second round if he could prove his worthiness and eager to conform to the hawthorn way! But IMO i believe we should add more midfield pace or a FULLBACK should be the aim!

100% correct IMO. For the 'box' to work effectively putting a crumber in there just congests it. We need the mids who are getting it in to run hard and fill that role.

One more outside mid with jet like pace and a KP Backman seem to be the biggest holes for me. Even if Dawson makes the grade and we use one or both of Thorp and Boyle down back rotating, another young developing backman for depth would be good.

I don't know whether we have to continue churning over the list so much this year. We haven't really had a chance to see what development last years draftee's have got in them yet.

Didak - NO. Does not address any of the key selection criteria and is too inconsistant in a weaker forward line so it would be harder for him at Hawthorn. Also too old. We do not want to be topping up.

 

[Nightwolf]

Are you kidding me? Of ****ing course we would..

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

If we are going to start giving picks away, I would rather do that for a full back. I still live in hope that as Muston, Ellis, Kennedy and Moss develop, that they will pick up the slack as Crawf spends his final three premiership years out of a forward pocket, snagging 50 goals a year.