Can Hawthorn succeed while ignoring the elite end of the draft?

[Bunk Moreland]

So many of their key older players looked absolutely cooked this finals series. Nearly half the best 22 that played this year will be 28 and older. Their trades are good, but it doesn't change the calculus - they are an old side, AFL seasons are long, and premierships are as much about having your best team fit and available in September as they are having the most talented side.

On the flipside, those they’re bringing in - Wingard, Scrimshaw, Mitchell, OMaera (other than possibly Scully) are far from cooked.

Yet they are expensive in terms of draft picks and Burton.

It’s a really interesting approach and equation.

 

[hk89]

So many of their key older players looked absolutely cooked this finals series.

Exactly, yet we still made top 4 after H&A. None of those players finished top 10 in our B&F, so it wasn't just the finals series. I'm not sure why it seems so complicated, but people seem to be struggling to understand that if you're already top 4 and you have a bunch of underperforming older players, then things are not that bad, because you don't need to replace an underperformer with a top performer to maintain your form. An average performer replacing an underperformer in that situation will raise your team performance.

A team like Carlton which nobody talks about having an aging list problem, are actually in a WORSE situation than Hawthorn in this regard. Their top 10 B&F had 5 blokes already over 30, and their top 5 had 2. They've had 2 retire that finished 8th and 9th, who they'll need to cover next year, and Murphy, Simpson and Thomas still to replace. Replacing guys still capable of finishing in your top 10 B&F is more problematic than the situation Hawthorn is facing. The only difference is that Carlton are seen as having more kids on the list that can replace them, but if they are kids already in the best 22 then you still need to find more kids to bring in to replace the empty spots. When you finish bottom and you have a bunch of 30+ blokes propping you up, you know you've still got some pain to come. When you're top 4 and your old blokes are no longer top contributors, you still have work to do on replacing them, but you're not going to drop off a cliff when the underperformers go unless you replace them with even worse performers, which we're trying to avoid.

 

[Jobe Watson]

Essendon posters still think the delay in his nomination after his own future father in law said he'd nominate several days earlier wasn't because Hawthorn were trying to negotiate a trade behind closed doors and eventually pulled out when it became clear GWS would not be satisfied with what we'd have left after grabbing the superior Wingard. Hilarious. If it makes you feel better, once we were out and Carlton refused to offer up pick 1, he chose you over Saints.

Hawthorn pulled out and yet Shiel still rang Clarko personally the next day to tell him "thanks but no thanks", which seems unnecessary considering Hawthorn had already told him no. Hawthorn pulled out and yet Shiel still made it publicly known that it was only ever between Essendon and Carlton. Seems like Hawthorn have invented their own narrative... like a teenager who got dumped: "I broke him up with them, they didn't break up with me!".

Hawthorn offered more years and more money and still couldn't get his signature. Same with Lynch. Too bad so sad. Hope that forward pocket who cost you a first rounder, Burton and a 2nd rounder works out well.

 

[its free real estate]

On the flipside, those they’re bringing in - Wingard, Scrimshaw, Mitchell, OMaera (other than possibly Scully) are far from cooked.

Yet they are expensive in terms of draft picks and Burton.

It’s a really interesting approach and equation.

This is treading water though isn’t it? They replace Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Rioli with younger versions of those players (at best), but still have the turnover and decline of a number of very handy players at the top end (Roughead, Burgoyne, McEvoy, Frawley, Breust).

It’s a strategy that ultimately hollows out the back end of a best 22 and is exposed late in the season.

 

[Gralin]

This is treading water though isn’t it? They replace Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Rioli with younger versions of those players (at best), but still have the turnover and decline of a number of very handy players at the top end (Roughead, Burgoyne, McEvoy, Frawley, Breust).

It’s a strategy that ultimately hollows out the back end of a best 22 and is exposed late in the season.

The two bolded had career years, hardly in decline, Breust will only be 28 next year, not exactly old either

 

[its free real estate]

The two bolded had career years, hardly in decline, Breust will only be 28 next year, not exactly old either

Breust was poor in finals though.

Eg Burgoyne was excellent in patches over the year, for a 50 year old man, but come September he was rooted.

 

[KermitJagger]

This is treading water though isn’t it? They replace Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Rioli with younger versions of those players (at best), but still have the turnover and decline of a number of very handy players at the top end (Roughead, Burgoyne, McEvoy, Frawley, Breust).

It’s a strategy that ultimately hollows out the back end of a best 22 and is exposed late in the season.

It depends on the development of the kids that you have, taking my obvious bias out of it - Hawthorn had more an inexperienced back end of our best 22, and not so much a poor one.

It remains to be seen whether it's treading water.

Fortunately what we did differently to Geelong is that instead of picking up 27 year olds we've picked up 24 year olds, and we've focused on identifying young talent from other sides that may be out of favour.

Ultimately we will always be weaker than our side that won 3 in a row, but with the expansion sides so will every other club in terms of their volume of talent.

 

[hk89]

Breust was poor in finals though.

Eg Burgoyne was excellent in patches over the year, for a 50 year old man, but come September he was rooted.

Come September he played with broken ribs sustained in the last home and away game. I was worried he looked cooked in finals before learning that too, but I think he's the least of our worries with the old blokes in terms of performance (so perhaps more of a worry in terms of what losing him will do).

 

[its free real estate]

Come September he played with two broken ribs sustained in the last home and away game. I was worried he looked cooked in finals before learning that too, but I think he's the least of our worries with the old blokes.

The point is that injuries are more prevalent the older you get. Burgoyne’s always been a smart player, him being on the wrong end of a bump or tackle that could injure him has been rare in his career.

Injuries, of all kinds, are a sign of decline.

 

[KermitJagger]

Breust was poor in finals though.

Eg Burgoyne was excellent in patches over the year, for a 50 year old man, but come September he was rooted.

Come September Burgoyne had broken ribs, and Melbourne were able to quash an uprising from a club who were unfortunately without their best defender and second best midfielder on the day.

I think our exit from the finals was overplayed, if Gunston kicks that goal (that he'd never normally miss) we'd have been within 10 points and the momentum shifts.

 

[hk89]

The point is that injuries are more prevalent the older you get. Burgoyne’s always been a smart player, him being on the wrong end of a bump or tackle that could injure him has been rare. Injuries, of all kinds, are a sign of decline.

That sounds like nonsense to me. I'll concede his two soft tissue injuries earlier in the year are a concern, but "injuries of all kinds" I don't agree with. Injuries caused because of the contact nature of the sport can happen to anyone, and I don't see how a guy smashing into your ribs is much more likely to injure a 30+ than a 25 year old. He's not 80 with osteoporosis.

 

[its free real estate]

Come September Burgoyne had broken ribs, and Melbourne were able to quash an uprising from a club who were unfortunately without their best defender and second best midfielder on the day.

What makes you think your injury rates will get better next year?

I think our exit from the finals was overplayed, if Gunston kicks that goal (that he'd never normally miss) we'd have been within 10 points and the momentum shifts.

You still go to Perth next week and get beaten, or do you think you win that after having lost to Richmond and Melbourne?

 

[its free real estate]

That sounds like nonsense to me. I'll concede his two soft tissue injuries earlier in the year are a concern, but "injuries of all kinds" I don't agree with. Injuries caused because of the contact nature of the sport can happen to anyone, and I don't see how a guy smashing into your ribs is much more likely to injure a 30+ than a 25 year old. He's not 80 with osteoporosis.

Knowing how to brace for contact or take evasive action is a skill, and Burgoyne has generally been good at that.

 

[Gralin]

Breust was poor in finals though.

Eg Burgoyne was excellent in patches over the year, for a 50 year old man, but come September he was rooted.

poor finals doesn't mean a player is declining, it means they had a poor finals

you're judging next years output for Breust and Burgoyne based on their finals

We know Burgoyne was injured and I know he's 36 so I'm not expecting him to carry the team next year.

Breust came up against 2 very good small defenders and wasn't given many opportunities by his mids in either final, I'm sure he would have liked to play better but he's not a player to put on the list you did

 

[Scotland]

The parallel for Hawthorn is Geelong.

Their run of flags ended in 2011 and they've been topping up ever since. Consistently in the finals or thereabouts but haven't gone further than a prelim despite a formidable H&A record. Similar to Hawthorn if they hadn't topped up just prior to their strong period they probably wouldn't have been as good. Ottens was huge for Geelong in finals, similar to Lake and Burgoyne with Hawthorn who had more second handers in their side.

Rivers, McIntosh, Clark, Stanley, Henderson, Smith, Dangerfield, Black, Tuohy, Crameri and now Dahlhaus and Rohan all brought in from other clubs at 25+ plus Ruggles, Menegola, Stewart, Kelly drafted as mature agers.

Remains to be seen if the current crop are good enough (On 2018 form no, but one year to the next these days is huge) or what will happen when Ablett, Dangerfield and Selwood are gone but has the period since 2011 been a success? Or are flags the only measure?

 

[KermitJagger]

What makes you think your injury rates will get better next year?

You still go to Perth next week and get beaten, or do you think you win that after having lost to Richmond and Melbourne?

I don't necessarily think they'll get better, but we can hope they don't impact two of our best players.

I think we lose to West Coast the next week, but for some reason that's 1000x better than a straight sets exit.

 

[its free real estate]

poor finals doesn't mean a player is declining, it means they had a poor finals

you're judging next years output for Breust and Burgoyne based on their finals

We know Burgoyne was injured and I know he's 36 so I'm not expecting him to carry the team next year.

Breust came up against 2 very good small defenders and wasn't given many opportunities by his mids in either final, I'm sure he would have liked to play better but he's not a player to put on the list you did

If an old team has a poor finals series, it generally shows they are in decline.

Hawks fans are in this thread making the same arguments they made prior to this years finals series about how they could go all the way. It is contingent on too many factors, against a back drop of better, younger and hungrier teams who already beat them this season.

 

[Scotland]

poor finals doesn't mean a player is declining, it means they had a poor finals

you're judging next years output for Breust and Burgoyne based on their finals

Breust had two shockers but a much better year overall than 2017. He's 27(?) and has played plenty of finals so is hardly declining. Just a player that does better in a team that is winning.

Burgoyne is 36 so declining is probably a fair call. Was always known as the break glass in case of emergency guy and didn't live up to that in this year's finals.

 

[Gralin]

If an old team has a poor finals series, it generally shows they are in decline.

Hawks fans are in this thread making the same arguments they made prior to this years finals series about how they could go all the way. It is contingent on too many factors, against a back drop of better, younger and hungrier teams who already beat them this season.

So Breust and McEvoy are in decline because Burgoyne is old?
None of the top 10 in the Hawks B&F was over 30 this year
Four of the top 5 were 26 or younger

Hawks list average age is 25.6 Melbourne are 24.9

The Hawks have the oldest list so they are going to fall off a cliff rhetoric is a good one though

Breust had two shockers but a much better year overall than 2017. He's 27(?) and has played plenty of finals so is hardly declining. Just a player that does better in a team that is winning.

Burgoyne is 36 so declining is probably a fair call. Was always known as the break glass in case of emergency guy and didn't live up to that in this year's finals.

Yeah I wasn't questioning Burgoyne being in the list just Breust and McEvoy

 

[KermitJagger]

If an old team has a poor finals series, it generally shows they are in decline.

Hawks fans are in this thread making the same arguments they made prior to this years finals series about how they could go all the way. It is contingent on too many factors, against a back drop of better, younger and hungrier teams who already beat them this season.

Isn't every premiership contingent on a lot many factors? Every year, 18 clubs have a chance to win a premiership and 1 out of those clubs does it. This year the consensus best club didn't even make the grand final, they were one flukey game from an American and a gastro epidemic away from making the Grand Final. That was Collingwood's luck, and West Coast's luck.

Age is a vastly overrated metric in the modern game, where there are in excess of 30 trades that take place each year. Perhaps previously it was important, where you had to plan your drafting and list management strategy based around your ability to pick up kids - Hawthorn have been taking and will continue to take a more mature and considered strategy based around the success rates of most draft picks (in short, very poor) and their ability to use those draft picks for talent who have established themselves and proven their ability to play at the highest level.

Looking at most other sports around the world with high player movement and a more transient base of players, I'd say that it was the appropriate strategy regardless of whether it was Hawthorn doing it or another club. The only reason Geelong haven't had success doing it is that they've targeted talent with the potential of immediate success and haven't considered too much of the future - we've paid more than they have but safeguarded for both immediate and long term success.

For further reference about the success of draft picks - around 17% of draftees play 100 games, and 11% never play a game at all.

 

[its free real estate]

So Breust and McEvoy are in decline because Burgoyne is old?
None of the top 10 in the Hawks B&F was over 30 this year
Four of the top 5 were 26 or younger

Hawks list average age is 25.6 Melbourne are 24.9

The Hawks have the oldest list so they are going to fall off a cliff rhetoric is a good one though

Every teams list hovers around the same mark due to a decent proportion of it being made up of 18-21 year olds who never play more than a couple of games.

What matters is the age of the best 22. Hawthorn’s is old. That is not a problem by itself, but having an old best 22 and getting better is a very difficult thing to do. A player like Breust being 28 may not be a problem, but having half the best 22 older than 28 is, because injury risk increases with age, and increases dramatically as a player approaches and surpasses 30.

Which is why you get teams like Geelong, Fremantle and Hawthorn bundles out in straight sets in recent years. Very old sides do it tougher at the end of the year

 

[Davo23]

True. But then add a year to everyone else as well who stayed.

So the ones who stayed will be one year older, but the ones who are out stay the same age?

Mind blown.

 

[WWSD]

Gunston 27, Breust 27, Shiels 27, Scully 27, Wingard 25, Mitchell 25, O’Meara 24, Sicily 23, Impey 23, Howe 23 and Hardwick 21 all still have plenty of footy left in them.

Sicily and Hardwick both finished in the top 10 in the best and fairest and had breakout seasons.

There’s a very good chance Sicily will be an All-Australian in 2019 if he can play most of next year.

 

[Trav 20]

Gunston 27, Breust 27, Shiels 27, Scully 27, Wingard 25, Mitchell 25, O’Meara 24, Sicily 23, Impey 23, Howe 23 and Hardwick 21 all still have plenty of footy left in them.

Sicily and Hardwick both finished in the top 10 in the best and fairest and had breakout seasons.

There’s a very good chance Sicily will be an All-Australian in 2019 if he can play most of next year.

Breust plays all of next year as a 28 year old and Shiels and Scully play most of it as 28 year olds - if the rodent plays at all.

 

[Gralin]

Breust plays all of next year as a 28 year old and Shiels and Scully play most of it as 28 year olds - if the rodent plays at all.

is 28 the new 30?