Toast Do we underrate Ricky Henderson?

[Milkshaker]

He doesn't get spoken about when we list all the terrific trades/free agents/etc. over the last decade or so; but he has been an absolute gem, a steal, a terrific contributor every single week

He was good at Adelaide as well for time, just never seemed to get his body right.

 

[Satchel]

from what I saw of the Crows Sat they have worse players still on their list - not sure why Hendo was the one chopped

 

[Brant]

from what I saw of the Crows Sat they have worse players still on their list - not sure why Hendo was the one chopped

Negotiations were said to sour when Hendo refused Adelaide's request that he promise never to turn 30...

 

[Agent Smith]

Negotiations were said to sour when Hendo refused Adelaide's request that he promise never to turn 30...

Considering he already looked 50 at the time? I'm befuddled.

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

I reckon he’s one of those players who you can wonder if he even played at times, you only seem to see him spasmodically and when he kicks a goal it’s like “******* finally Hendo, you bloody do something”.
At the end of the game, you look at the stats and he’s had 20+, 5 marks, 4 score involvements and a few tackles and it’s l8ke, s**t, there you go.
Underrated player and valuable to structure and run.
Been a very good pickup

 

[Rocket72]

from what I saw of the Crows Sat they have worse players still on their list - not sure why Hendo was the one chopped

I'd heard that he was keen to return to Victoria and the crows were making the wrong noises about $ and length of contract. It wasn't so much that the crows delisted him, just that he didn't sign the contract they were offering. Just saying that they knew he wasn't a dud. Though ironically they probably did under rate him ;-)

 

[Flag08]

Even if Scully comes in, I’d rather see Morrison go out than Hendo.

 

[toomanysquibs]

Henderson should be even better for us, if the running power of our midfield suddenly gets some currency again in the AFL's number of the beast set up era.

It's only round one, but there's been a bit more space, and you could see that the kick in rule has suddenly meant that the power running game can work again out of D50. A lot of our goals were super slick rebounds that either put the ball in our 50, or set up scoring chances.

Ditto for 50m penalties, the added speed there means that runners get a chance to torch an opponent on the burst, rather than walk slowly in line with player receiving the penalty.

It may be that the high press gets replaced by something a bit more like the cluster during kick ins, but then that was picked apart pretty good post 2008.

With Henderson (who stood up so many times last year when others did not), Smith, Nash, and potentially Scully, we've got a core of power endurance runners - supported by Poppy on the burst - that few teams will be able to go with.

Be interesting to see how it pans out, and whether the rule changes translate to more free flowing run in the long term.

 

[MasterSamurai]

Apparently he’s a lot more vocal around training and in games then he used to be. Feels that he really belongs and why shouldn’t he? His numbers aren’t worse off than Bradley’s, yeah?

 

[hk89]

Apparently he’s a lot more vocal around training and in games then he used to be. Feels that he really belongs and why shouldn’t he? His numbers aren’t worse off than Bradley’s, yeah?

I think I pointed this out back when he joined us and people were blaming him (amongst others) for our losses. If you look at the numbers he was putting up they were not massively different to what Hill was giving us, especially during the stretches when Hill wasn't at the absolute peak of his game, which was more often than people seem to like to admit. I think there has been a lot of rose coloured glasses applied to Hill after his departure. While I agree he was important part of the side, I just don't think he was as lethal on the wing as many seem to remember him as.

Stats wise, compare some of the data of Hill 2016 vs Ricky 2018

Hill : Av Disp: 17.4 Marks: 3 I50: 3.9 Clearances: 1.0 Metres Gained: 329 DE:72.1 Contested Pos: 3.5 Score involvements: 5.8
Ricky Av Disp: 20.3 Marks: 6.3 I50: 3.3 Clearances: 1.4 Metres Gained: 359 DE:75.2 Contested Pos: 5.6 Score involvements: 5.0

So Hill in his final year with us was definitely a bit more attacking in terms of inside 50s and score involvements, but I reckon Ricky played on the defensive side of wing more often than Hill did. Ricky used it a little better on paper (although I suspect delivering inside 50 more often for Hill leads to lower DE as you do need to kick to 1 on 1's sometimes which Hawthorn tries to avoid when transitioning from defence). Metres gained is similar with Ricky with the edge again, Ricky gets a bit more of it and gets more contested.

Basically on paper Ricky turned out to be a much better replacement for Hill than many gave him credit for (and those 2018 stats are not massively different to his 2017 stats when he was getting bagged every week on here, he was perhaps less attacking again in 2017, but I reckon he ran off half back more often in that year which explains the lower I50 count).

Now Hill has improved since moving to the dockers (not surprising, he was injected into our team when still quite young), and I wonder if people are often comparing modern Hill when they think Ricky is a poor shadow of what Hill was. Hill had a bit of class that perhaps doesn't come through on paper that Ricky might lack, but the gap between them was never large enough to properly explain the negative feelings many seemed to have for Henderson.

In any case I'm of the view that once you pull the Hawthorn jumper on there is a certain level of default respect you deserve to be shown, irrespective of your talent levels. This doesn't mean players should be above criticism, but some of the way our players get talked about on here after losses, you'd think they were wearing red and black, and returning from a drug sanction.

 

[Argy]

Apparently he’s a lot more vocal around training and in games then he used to be. Feels that he really belongs and why shouldn’t he? His numbers aren’t worse off than Bradley’s, yeah?

The criticism coming from some posters reminds me of how Hill was perceived. Then when he left they suddenly noticed how important he was to our game.

 

[toomanysquibs]

The criticism coming from some posters reminds me of how Hill was perceived. Then when he left they suddenly noticed how important he was to our game.

Amen to this, it's still coming with Henderson being a better mark, and a bit more combative in the physical stuff.

Even when people get what they want (more physical stuff), they still don't necessarily get the real value either has brought to the table.

 

[HODGEYROAD]

Even if Scully comes in, I’d rather see Morrison go out than Hendo.

For me that probably depends on how the team is travelling, I agree Hendo is better for the side right now, but getting games into Harry is better long term, so for me that comes down to if we think we're going to play finals and potentially be a threat in finals.

 

[BlueWaterHawk]

I like his hair.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[MasterSamurai]

I think I pointed this out back when he joined us and people were blaming him (amongst others) for our losses. If you look at the numbers he was putting up they were not massively different to what Hill was giving us, especially during the stretches when Hill wasn't at the absolute peak of his game, which was more often than people seem to like to admit. I think there has been a lot of rose coloured glasses applied to Hill after his departure. While I agree he was important part of the side, I just don't think he was lethal on the wing as many seem to remember him as.

Stats wise, compare some of data of Hill 2016 vs Ricky 2018

Hill : Av Disp: 17.4 Marks: 3 I50: 3.9 Clearances: 1.0 Metres Gained: 329 DE:72.1 Contested Pos: 3.5 Score involvements: 5.8
Ricky Av Disp: 20.3 Marks: 6.3 I50: 3.3 Clearances: 1.4 Metres Gained: 359 DE:75.2 Contested Pos: 5.6 Score involvements: 5.0

So Hill in his final year with us was definitely a bit more attacking in terms of inside 50s and score involvements, but I reckon Ricky played on the defensive side of wing more often than Hill did. Ricky used it a little better on paper (although I suspect delivering inside 50 more often for Hill leads to lower DE as you do need to kick to 1 on 1's sometimes which Hawthorn tries to avoid when transitioning from defence). Metres gained is similar with Ricky with the edge again, Ricky gets a bit more of it and gets more contested.

Basically on paper Ricky turned out to be a much better replacement for Hill than many gave him credit for (and those 2018 stats are not massively different to his 2017 stats when he was getting bagged every week on here, he was perhaps less attacking again in 2017, but I reckon he ran off half back more often in that year which explains the lower I50 count).

Now Hill has improved since moving to the dockers (not surprising, he was injected into our team when still quite young), and I wonder if people are often comparing modern Hill when they think Ricky is a poor shadow of what Hill was. Hill had a bit of class that perhaps doesn't come through on paper that Ricky might lack, but the gap between them was never large enough to properly explain the negative feelings many seemed to have for Henderson.

In any case I'm of the view that once you pull the Hawthorn jumper on there is a certain level of default respect you deserve to be shown, irrespective of your talent levels. This doesn't mean players should be above criticism, but some of the way our players get talked about on here after losses, you'd think they were wearing red and black, and returning from a drug sanction.

Agree with everything re Hill vs Henderson.
But I mostly liked how you found a way to needle the stain of the injectors in there. Good work!

 

[KermitJagger]

I'd heard that he was keen to return to Victoria and the crows were making the wrong noises about $ and length of contract. It wasn't so much that the crows delisted him, just that he didn't sign the contract they were offering. Just saying that they knew he wasn't a dud. Though ironically they probably did under rate him ;-)

That doesn't work like that, you can't sign somewhere as a DFA if you had a contract in front of you that you refused to sign. Would have been that they never officially put that contract on the table and just let him go amicably.

 

[KermitJagger]

I think I pointed this out back when he joined us and people were blaming him (amongst others) for our losses. If you look at the numbers he was putting up they were not massively different to what Hill was giving us, especially during the stretches when Hill wasn't at the absolute peak of his game, which was more often than people seem to like to admit. I think there has been a lot of rose coloured glasses applied to Hill after his departure. While I agree he was important part of the side, I just don't think he was lethal on the wing as many seem to remember him as.

Stats wise, compare some of data of Hill 2016 vs Ricky 2018

Hill : Av Disp: 17.4 Marks: 3 I50: 3.9 Clearances: 1.0 Metres Gained: 329 DE:72.1 Contested Pos: 3.5 Score involvements: 5.8
Ricky Av Disp: 20.3 Marks: 6.3 I50: 3.3 Clearances: 1.4 Metres Gained: 359 DE:75.2 Contested Pos: 5.6 Score involvements: 5.0

So Hill in his final year with us was definitely a bit more attacking in terms of inside 50s and score involvements, but I reckon Ricky played on the defensive side of wing more often than Hill did. Ricky used it a little better on paper (although I suspect delivering inside 50 more often for Hill leads to lower DE as you do need to kick to 1 on 1's sometimes which Hawthorn tries to avoid when transitioning from defence). Metres gained is similar with Ricky with the edge again, Ricky gets a bit more of it and gets more contested.

Basically on paper Ricky turned out to be a much better replacement for Hill than many gave him credit for (and those 2018 stats are not massively different to his 2017 stats when he was getting bagged every week on here, he was perhaps less attacking again in 2017, but I reckon he ran off half back more often in that year which explains the lower I50 count).

Now Hill has improved since moving to the dockers (not surprising, he was injected into our team when still quite young), and I wonder if people are often comparing modern Hill when they think Ricky is a poor shadow of what Hill was. Hill had a bit of class that perhaps doesn't come through on paper that Ricky might lack, but the gap between them was never large enough to properly explain the negative feelings many seemed to have for Henderson.

In any case I'm of the view that once you pull the Hawthorn jumper on there is a certain level of default respect you deserve to be shown, irrespective of your talent levels. This doesn't mean players should be above criticism, but some of the way our players get talked about on here after losses, you'd think they were wearing red and black, and returning from a drug sanction.

I understand that their base statistics were somewhat similar but it's the intangibles that make the difference. Brad Hill is easily the best repeat sprinter in the competition, that's not opinion - that is fact. He is to repeat sprinting what Scully is to gut running, holds a fair chunk of the top 10 records in that regards.

What that means is he has a better ability to stretch the field of the opposition, better ability to flood back in defense and forward in attack. He was also generally quicker, and of course younger which is what people see.

Not disagreeing that Ricky has been better than what people would have expected, but we still do miss the spacing and everything else those sprinting efforts provide.

 

[Hawk_francais]

Even if Scully comes in, I’d rather see Morrison go out than Hendo.

I think that's a good point, although it may be Scrimshaw that goes out with Henderson filling his spot. No doubt Jack has some things about our game plan and his role he can work on effectively at BH like Worpel did. Harry, on the other hand, has done his time there - he needs to learn from Scully, Smith.

 

[TheFourPillars]

For me that probably depends on how the team is travelling, I agree Hendo is better for the side right now, but getting games into Harry is better long term, so for me that comes down to if we think we're going to play finals and potentially be a threat in finals.

Here's the thing if you are on the list and playing well what's the justification for picking someone else instead of you who isn't performing as well?
Age?

Everyone earns their place in the side. If you are good enough you will displace Henderson. He stays in until someone replaces him. Competition for spots is very good motivator for a footy club. Keeps everyone interested and happy. Everyone knows why they are being selected and there is a standard for the inclusion of the players. Our structures and reviews make us a great football club but they also make it easy for the coaches to measure performance objectively

 

[TheFourPillars]

Finally age profile doesn't come into it when selecting a team to represent Hawthorn on the weekend

 

[Luv_our_club]

Rhetorical question, really... I think even we Hawthorn supporters underrate what Ricky brings to the table each week - adds an element we lack when absent from the side; run and a goal-a-game.

IMO, since Bradley Hill's departure, our running ability has dried up somewhat, leaving burden on the shoulders of Isaac Smith. The injection of a fit Tom Scully and Chad Wingard, on top of Ricky Henderson, begins to balance up a midfield of primarily inside players (Worpel, Cousins, O'Meara, Howe, Shiels).

Thoughts?

I am a big fan of Ricky.... and I expect him to build into the season. His best form will come after he is fully match fit.

I personally would have him in our best 22 with Scully.

 

[WWSD]

from what I saw of the Crows Sat they have worse players still on their list - not sure why Hendo was the one chopped

Crows fans on here were adamant that David Mackay is a better player than Henderson.

 

[RoughysMullet]

Never forget that goal he kicked against Sydney at the SCG late last year- he officially won me over at that point. Has been a great pick up- will never be a superstar but a great role player

 

[hk89]

I understand that their base statistics were somewhat similar but it's the intangibles that make the difference. Brad Hill is easily the best repeat sprinter in the competition, that's not opinion - that is fact. He is to repeat sprinting what Scully is to gut running, holds a fair chunk of the top 10 records in that regards.

What that means is he has a better ability to stretch the field of the opposition, better ability to flood back in defense and forward in attack. He was also generally quicker, and of course younger which is what people see.

Not disagreeing that Ricky has been better than what people would have expected, but we still do miss the spacing and everything else those sprinting efforts provide.

I agree the basic stats don't tell the full story. Hill was (and is) certainly an endurance beast. He was quick, but not really super quick, as his repeat effort stats (league record in at least 2017, probably other years too) are mostly built on his insane endurance rather than his top speed. Was only 10th in his draft year for sprint speed, but equal 10th all time for 3km time trial and equal third best all time for beep test (a pity they switched to yoyo, making comparisons with the current draft crops difficult).

I agree his repeat sprint efforts did open up the ground for us in ways that Ricky doesn't match, but Ricky has some strengths over Hill too, so I still think Ricky was a much better replacement than many would admit. Would I have Ricky over Hill? No, especially not the player Hill has become, given he's continued to improve. As you've pointed out, Hill was elite in at least one area, whereas Ricky probably isn't. I'm still very pleased with what we've got from Henderson compared to what we paid (and I'm one of those who would consider the idea that Henderson might be the player that goes when Scully comes in, although as I mentioned earlier, I really do hope we can find a spot for him). While not elite in any one area, Henderson is probably a little more well rounded than Hill, which helps with providing flexibility (something that will hopefully allow him to stay in the side when Scully comes back, but I'll also understand if the club chooses to continue to develop a younger player over shuffling things to keep Henderson in).

I also think Ricky deserved more respect from day one. A lot more people have warmed to him now, but that seems to be more about how long it takes for people to change their mind than him suddenly stepping up. He's been at a pretty consistent level across his time with us I reckon, although he is perhaps benefiting from a bit more confidence now that he feels he belongs.

 

[cs61]

Has been very valuable. Astute selection given the run we lost and how little we paid for him. If we can get Wingard and Scully on the park, he'll be even more of a pest as there will be others the opposition will worry about first, and Henderson is very good at reading the play to get free for a goal or two at key moments in a game. Hits the scoreboard consistently, and creates good run and makes good decisions. Also a little bit harder at the footy than I was led to believe after he left Adelaide, and thought he goes when he needs to given the type of player he is.