An Injury FREE fully fit Hawthorn team

[SirJimi05]

seeing other supporters write us off when the FACT is we are one of the better sides on the UP! If we played like we did in 2008, it's promising to see what we will be like in 2-3 years when our younger players mature...

I'm afraid this is not a fact. The fact is you are currently the 9th best team in the competition. If you play like you did in 2008 i'm sure that will improve.

I'm not even sure you are the youngest team in the competiton either. Or are you refering to lists and not team? I'm sure that Essendon fielded the two youngest teams in the history of the competition this sdeason but i could be wrong.

 

[worthy]

Has there ever been an injury free, fully fit team?

We don't have great depth, particularily in our weaker areas, so injuries in those areas take a greater toll.
Our game style/plan looked a shambles when under pressure in 09 due to not having the personel to effectively carry it out, some questions were also raised the lack of a plan B.
I think we are capable of playing finals, and even capable of winning the Premiership, but so are several other clubs.

 

[Slattery_20]

Has there ever been an injury free, fully fit team?

We don't have great depth, particularily in our weaker areas, so injuries in those areas take a greater toll.
Our game style/plan looked a shambles when under pressure in 09 due to not having the personel to effectively carry it out, some questions were also raised the lack of a plan B.
I think we are capable of playing finals, and even capable of winning the Premiership, but so are several other clubs.

Nail, head, hit.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Thank god a GC supporter chimed in, I was beginning to think that Essendon fans were the only ones who cared.


Btw, Subaru, there is no such thing as 'overachieved', it simply cannot happen. You either play to the best of your ability or you don't, and most intelligent football followers know this.

 

[TeamHurley]

Going to be an interesting season

 

[The House]

Ironic really. You want me to acknowledge that other clubs may have gone past Hawthorn, yet you think it's silly of me to assume that our players may have improvement in them from 2008.

See this is why I don't really give much credit to your posts.

Of course we think we think we are a big chance to figure in the top few if we get all our players on the park and get their heads right. Is my point still lost on you?
We won the flag ahead of schedule, with a heap more development left in our list.
Are you suggesting otherwise?

Galon, i'm sorry mate, but you're so full of shit.
Post after post you claim i'm saying things i'm not.
"I think it's silly to assume some Hawkers will have natural improvement from 08???" Do I? Okay mate, well if you say that's what I think....

And my question wasn't do you think they have gone past you?...read it properly.
My question was do you acknowledge any of them have improved...and you still haven't answered it.
Probably because the answer is yes, which doesn't help your blindly bias argument.
We both know that teams go in cycles, and saints, dogs, and crows are all improved, and therefore logic would dictate are harder to finish above now, than they were in 08. It's common sense.
And the cats are still looking pretty good for another year or 3.

The dogs are at the end of their window and i think most of us would tip the Hawks to be a better chance of a flag 2 years from now than the dogs, but for mine, not in 2010.

But you go ahead and keep making up points of view on my behalf and avoiding the questions champ. And perhaps you could follow it up by dismissing any relevant points i make by claiming i have no credibility...nice deflection from the actual point at hand, but not really offereing any valuable comment on the points of view raised i'm afraid.

 

[The House]

yer i think hawks will come 5th this year just missing the top 4. in my ladder pridict i had westen bulldogs saints collingwood and gellong ahead then hawthorn adalaide and lions but all 7 can make top 4 next year

that was the point i was trying to get across haha

You see Galon, some Hawthorn supporters do have a balanced point of view....kudo's to you Barlow!

 

[captain peanut]

I dont know about other fellow posters but Im sick of hawthorns injury excuse.
Fact is - Injurys are part of the game.
Every team gets injurys.
Its the good teams that get over them.
Do you think a great team like Geelong would use that excuse excuse? NO because they have depth.
they have 2 players for every position (or atleast aim to).
its what makes them so great.
Its pretty pathetic by Hawks supporters to keep harping on about injuries.
Get over it,its a part of the game.
Stop using that excuse or stop loving the game of football because its a part of the game. - and its why i love it so much (cos its a hard tough game)

best post in this bullsh*t thread started and propogated by hawk supporters to make themselves feel better about the upcoming season. get over the injury excuse for 09 hawks and move on. injuries or not the hawks were horribly disappointing in 2009 and injuries alone do not cut it as the reason. sensational forward line, pretty good midfield that could do with an injection of speed, poor ruck division and a poor backline (especially when exposed due to the failure of the fabled rolling zone in 2009) mean the hawks will still be well short of the top 2 or 3 in 2010

there's a side called geelong that had a few injuries in the year just gone as well - if my memory serves me correct some blokes called ottens johnson chapman harley hunt milburn scarlett ablett stokes kelly missed multiple games throughout the course of the season, especially in the second half in the run to the finals, and/or played hurt in a few including big finals. how'd they end up?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Galon, i'm sorry mate, but you're so full of shit.
Post after post you claim i'm saying things i'm not.
"I think it's silly to assume some Hawkers will have natural improvement from 08???" Do I? Okay mate, well if you say that's what I think....

And my question wasn't do you think they have gone past you?...read it properly.
My question was do you acknowledge any of them have improved...and you still haven't answered it.
Probably because the answer is yes, which doesn't help your blindly bias argument.
We both know that teams go in cycles, and saints, dogs, and crows are all improved, and therefore logic would dictate are harder to finish above now, than they were in 08. It's common sense.
And the cats are still looking pretty good for another year or 3.

The dogs are at the end of their window and i think most of us would tip the Hawks to be a better chance of a flag 2 years from now than the dogs, but for mine, not in 2010.

But you go ahead and keep making up points of view on my behalf and avoiding the questions champ. And perhaps you could follow it up by dismissing any relevant points i make by claiming i have no credibility...nice deflection from the actual point at hand, but not really offereing any valuable comment on the points of view raised i'm afraid.

Of course some other teams have improved, but in a year where we played well below expectation we were still in contention for a finals spot in the last round. (If you think I've got you so wrong, tell me exactly what you're trying to say.)
The same 'common sense' you speak of now that has St kilda, Bulldogs and Crows up and about would've had Hawthorn at the peak of their powers in 2009, once you saw the 2008 flag. Like I keep saying, so many people recognised that we have a massive amount of upside.

Anyway, I reckon Bosk summed it up,
If you feel you cannot gauge Hawthorn's value as a team based on its' 2008 performance that's fine- provided you don't gauge it based on 2009 either!


I do find it interesting though, that the one set of posters who genuinely accept that Hawthorn are a huge threat in 2010 are Geelong supporters, mainly because they've seen first hand what we are capable of(round 17, round 1, 2008 GF) with the current list, and they are not short sighted enough to think that becuase they finished well above us in 2009, that we're no chance of repeating 2008 any time soon.
Meanwhile, we have Essendon fans lining up in here to debunk almost every theory as to why we may rise again.
It just seems like you're desperate to stay 'neck a neck' with us in 2010.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

there's a side called geelong that had a few injuries in the year just gone as well - if my memory serves me correct some blokes called ottens johnson chapman harley hunt milburn scarlett ablett stokes kelly missed multiple games throughout the course of the season, especially in the second half in the run to the finals, and/or played hurt in a few including big finals. how'd they end up?

And look at how their list is set up.

Listed Players 'Past their Prime' ('Overs 29s' - Born Before 31-12-1980)

1. Western Bulldogs - 12.50%
2. St Kilda - 11.63%
3. Adelaide - 11.36%
4. Geelong - 11.36%
5. Sydney - 9.52%
6. Fremantle - 9.30%
7. Port Adelaide - 9.30%
8. Brisbane - 7.50%
9. Collingwood - 6.67%
10. Richmond - 5.13%
11. Melbourne - 4.65%
12. Essendon - 2.50%
13. Carlton - 2.38%
14. West Coast - 2.38%
15. North Melbourne - 2.27%
16. Hawthorn - 2.17%

Listed Players 'In their Prime' (Between 24 and 29 Years - Born Between 31-12-1980 and 31-12-1985)

1. Geelong - 36.36%
2. Brisbane - 35.00%
3. Fremantle - 32.56%
4. St Kilda - 32.56%
5. Western Bulldogs - 30.00%
6. Collingwood - 28.89%
7. Sydney - 28.57%
8. Port Adelaide - 27.91%
9. Essendon - 27.50%
10. Carlton - 26.19%
11. Hawthorn - 26.09%
12. North Melbourne - 25.00%
13. West Coast - 23.81%
14. Melbourne - 23.26%
15. Adelaide - 22.73%
16. Richmond - 15.38%

Listed Players 'Yet to Reach Their Prime' ('Under 24s' - Born After 31-12-1985)

1. Richmond - 79.49%
2. West Coast - 73.81%
3. North Melbourne - 72.73%
4. Melbourne - 72.09%
5. Hawthorn - 71.74%
6. Essendon - 70.00%
7. Carlton - 69.05%
8. Collingwood - 64.44%
9. Sydney - 64.29%
10. Adelaide - 63.64%
11. Port Adelaide - 62.79%
12. Fremantle - 58.14%
13. Brisbane - 57.50%
14. Western Bulldogs - 57.50%
15. St Kilda - 55.81%
16. Geelong - 52.27%

Stats thanks to Damon_3388.

Said it before and I'll say it again, when we lose depth players like Tuck, Whitecross, Suckling, Boyle etc to injury and lose a few of our key players like Ellis, Ladson, Guerra etc our depth is tested, bigtime, because we don't have that back up of experience waiting in the wings like other teams do.

 

[The House]

Of course some other teams have improved, but in a year where we played well below expectation we were still in contention for a finals spot in the last round. (If you think I've got you so wrong, tell me exactly what you're trying to say.)
The same 'common sense' you speak of now that has St kilda, Bulldogs and Crows up and about would've had Hawthorn at the peak of their powers in 2009, once you saw the 2008 flag. Like I keep saying, so many people recognised that we have a massive amount of upside.

Anyway, I reckon Bosk summed it up,
If you feel you cannot gauge Hawthorn's value as a team based on its' 2008 performance that's fine- provided you don't gauge it based on 2009 either!


I do find it interesting though, that the one set of posters who genuinely accept that Hawthorn are a huge threat in 2010 are Geelong supporters, mainly because they've seen first hand what we are capable of(round 17, round 1, 2008 GF) with the current list, and they are not short sighted enough to think that becuase they finished well above us in 2009, that we're no chance of repeating 2008 any time soon.
Meanwhile, we have Essendon fans lining up in here to debunk almost every theory as to why we may rise again.
It just seems like you're desperate to stay 'neck a neck' with us in 2010.

Oh my god, can you not read? Your bolded text is pretty much what i've been saying...glad you've come around.
One last time, i'm not tipping the Hawks to miss the finals again....just not a walk up for the top 4 (all things being equal).
To which you responded by saying i lacked credibility...but now you seem to agree with Bosk when he says the same thing.
I'm glad we sorted that out.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Oh my god, can you not read? Your bolded text is pretty much what i've been saying...glad you've come around.
One last time, i'm not tipping the Hawks to miss the finals again....just not a walk up for the top 4 (all things being equal).
To which you responded by saying i lacked credibility...but now you seem to agree with Bosk when he says the same thing.
I'm glad we sorted that out.

Good to see you agree with me.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Here's another way of looking at it:

2008 = 182 games missed due to injury = 1st
2009 = 296 games missed due to injury = 9th.

2010

~238 games missed due to injury = 5th
<200 games missed due to injury = 1st
>280 games missed due to injury = 9th.

 

[TeamHurley]

Here's another way of looking at it:

2008 = 182 games missed due to injury = 1st
2009 = 296 games missed due to injury = 9th.

2010

~238 games missed due to injury = 5th
<200 games missed due to injury = 1st
>280 games missed due to injury = 9th.

I think this formula has a 100% chance of predicting Hawthorn's ladder position next year.

 

[SirJimi05]

Here's another way of looking at it:

2008 = 182 games missed due to injury = 1st
2009 = 296 games missed due to injury = 9th.

2010

~238 games missed due to injury = 5th
<200 games missed due to injury = 1st
>280 games missed due to injury = 9th.

Yeah but most of those 296 games were missed by average players and fringe players. Very misleading stat is the total games missed one. I think everyone would agree with this.

The only way to gauge a teams injuries is to break it down much further. Which players were injured, how many games did the best players miss, long term injuries, how many of your best players were injured in the same games etc etc.

 

[SirJimi05]

I think this formula has a 100% chance of predicting Hawthorn's ladder position next year.

I think 100% of people would agree with you excluding the guy that posted it.

 

[QuietB]

Yeah but most of those 296 games were missed by average players and fringe players. Very misleading stat is the total games missed one. I think everyone would agree with this.

The only way to gauge a teams injuries is to break it down much further. Which players were injured, how many games did the best players miss, long term injuries, how many of your best players were injured in the same games etc etc.

I think that is the point hawks supporters are trying to make re injuries. You will say that Ladson, Guerra, Gilham and Birchall are not the hawks best players. But if you take out Croad and Hodge at times as well there were periods this year where the hawks did not have a single first choice defender available, and the replacement players like Ellis, Dew & Whitecross were injured too.

Hawks ended up with the backline of Murphy as a KPP - clearly not suited, Campbell as a KPP - spent the whole season both out of position and playing injured which ultimately forced him to retire, Mitchell playing in the backline because his shoulder was screwed, Hodge playing KPP at times and at one stage ruck, etc. etc.

Pretty much every premiership team in living memory including the hawks in 08 have had a very settled and established backline as their foundation. They might not be stars but they do a job.

As for trying to win matches without ruckman, well I think essendon fans know all about that...

 

[SirJimi05]

I think that is the point hawks supporters are trying to make re injuries. You will say that Ladson, Guerra, Gilham and Birchall are not the hawks best players. But if you take out Croad and Hodge at times as well there were periods this year where the hawks did not have a single first choice defender available, and the replacement players like Ellis, Dew & Whitecross were injured too.

Hawks ended up with the backline of Murphy as a KPP - clearly not suited, Campbell as a KPP - spent the whole season both out of position and playing injured which ultimately forced him to retire, Mitchell playing in the backline because his shoulder was screwed, Hodge playing KPP at times and at one stage ruck, etc. etc.

Pretty much every premiership team in living memory including the hawks in 08 have had a very settled and established backline as their foundation. They might not be stars but they do a job.

As for trying to win matches without ruckman, well I think essendon fans know all about that...

Birchall and Hodge played almost every game. Guerra played 16. Mitchell was your best player so not sure how far you can use the injury card with him.

I have acknowledged that Croad, Ladson & Gillham were out for extended periods and were losses. But, is this any worse then other clubs? Your 3 biggest losses fort he season were Croad, Ladson & Gillham and then players like Ellis, Dew and Whitecross.

And in what game was Hodge your ruckman. And please don't give an example where he was thrid man up. It would be like me saying Bachar Houli rucked for Essendon because i have seen him go thrid man up.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

I should given up on this thread alot earlier, but it intrigues me as to why are a bunch of Essendon supporters are so keen on arguing that Hawthorn will be no good in 2010?

 

[gaz15]

This is a joke right? This season showed just how poor Hawthorns depth is after its best 20.

Your depth outside your best 22 (including Burgoyne and Gibson) consists of;

Duryea, Grimley, Hooper, Lisle, Lowden, Morton, Murphy, Muston, Renouf, Savage, Shiels, Bailey, Stratton, Suckling, Tuck, Whitecross, and J Williams

That's as bad a depth as any club in the league, you'd want to hope for an injury free fully fit team.

I agree to a point. But our best 24-25 is top 4 and our top 10 is as good as ANY in the league. Franklin, Hodge, Sewell, Mitchell, Roughead, Bateman, Burgoyne, Rioli, Lewis and Croad (if he gets back). That would compete with geel and saints top ten easily. I know 10 players dont make a flag but i see definate improvement from ellis, young, shoenmakers, whitecross, sheils, dowler and even gibson. At our best 2-4. Bad run with injuries or hunger, 6-10.
09 was the most dissapointing season i have witnessed. Hopefullly we get a bit of our C*** back next year, because that was what won the flag. hardness and desparation.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Hodge was our 2nd ruck after Bailey went down again, either just rd.22 or both 21 and 22 I forget.

Was funny seeing him beat the opposition ruck consistently though. Think it was just a kid though, not a real ruckman.

 

[QuietB]

Birchall and Hodge played almost every game. Guerra played 16. Mitchell was your best player so not sure how far you can use the injury card with him.

I have acknowledged that Croad, Ladson & Gillham were out for extended periods and were losses. But, is this any worse then other clubs? Your 3 biggest losses fort he season were Croad, Ladson & Gillham and then players like Ellis, Dew and Whitecross.

And in what game was Hodge your ruckman. And please don't give an example where he was thrid man up. It would be like me saying Bachar Houli rucked for Essendon because i have seen him go thrid man up.

Hodge contested centre bounces against your mob when Rnouf was probably completely spent. I am sure you know that you cannot contest a centre bounce as third man up but not much surprises me with the ignorance of essendon fans As Galon says, why do you even care?

 

[TalkBox]

Haha, how are we still arguing over Hawthorns 2009 season and the injury excuse? 2009 is dead and buried, Hawthorn have a lot to prove in 2010, lets see how it pans out.

 

[Jade]

This thread is still going? Geezus.....

Nobody can know for sure what will happen next year, and anyone that says they do can immediately be dismissed as an idiot.

Personally I think the following is a pretty accurate representation of Hawthorn's recent form and likely future next year:

- Hawks were good in 2008, and had alot of things go right for them. Geelong were definetely the best side for the year, but you do have to show up on Grand Final day, and they didn't. Flags are bloody hard to win, so good on the Hawks.

- Hawks were ravaged by injuries in 2009, which anyone knows can really screw a season. Whilst they are better then their ladder position reflected, cracks were shown up in their depth.

- The zone defense that was so effective in 2008 was figured out. Teams that run the ball were able to move through it and hurt the Hawks on the socreboard.

- With an equal amount of luck as every other team with injuries, Hawks in my opinion are a 5th to 8th side. I believe I had them in 7th or 8th in my prediction for 2010.

 

[SirJimi05]

Hodge contested centre bounces against your mob when Rnouf was probably completely spent.

Wouldn't mind seeing some footage. I'm o/s atm so only watched the game in a bar (quite drunk) but i can't recall that happening. The other Hawks guy reckons he one the ruck duals. Who dod he beat Ryder or Hooker?

As Galon says, why do you even care

Galon says that? Pretty funny coming from a guy who as obsessed with Essendon as he is.