Can Hawthorn succeed while ignoring the elite end of the draft? - Part 2

[Blackhawk42]

Hawks are a bottom 2 side, so highlighting individual match winners at present doesn't mean too much.
Mitchell is a good player, not a great player. He isn't someone who you would build a team around right now. A late 20s pick, early 30s is about what he is worth

We'll have to agree to disagree. I fully expect us to trade him and I fully expect it to be for a pretty high pick.

 

[Crankyhawk]

That is not true. Hawks and Swans have a reasonable rlp at the trade table. Oddly enough given the on field history we also get fair deals done with West Coast. If Tom wanted to go there a fair deal would get done.

Thats fair when we are talking trading for your players, but I can't recall any fair trade for our players in recent history (which resulted in significant pick - so kaiden brand doesn't count). Josh Kennedy was quite some time ago. But I was more meaning the example of Brad hill going to fremantle compared to the overpay adam saad got for bombers.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

But I was more meaning the example of Brad hill going to fremantle compared to the overpay adam saad got for bombers.

I think this is more a reflection on Carlton's stupidity at the Trade Table. Their collection of high buy recruits is worse than Norths.

 

[Pessimistic]

I’m still seeing our next flag come before at least half of the other teams get one if at all. Mind you that’s quite a conservative estimate.

 

[Draft Pick]

I’m still seeing our next flag come before at least half of the other teams get one if at all. Mind you that’s quite a conservative estimate.

Why ?

 

[Pessimistic]

Why ?

‘we slacked off for 18 years and ‘only’ 9 teams ‘saluted’ in that time.

as an said, it’s a pretty conservative statement. The club knows how to do this.

Fremantles half a decade away from 35 yrs no flag.. like the hawks 1925-61

 

[Draft Pick]

‘we slacked off for 18 years and ‘only’ 9 teams ‘saluted’ in that time.

as an said, it’s a pretty conservative statement. The club knows how to do this.

Fremantles half a decade away from 35 yrs no flag.. like the hawks 1925-61

Maybe.

But Richmond forgot how to do it from the early 80’s to 2017.

Carlton likewise from mid 90’s to ?

 

[SA HAWK]

Maybe.

But Richmond forgot how to do it from the early 80’s to 2017.

Carlton likewise from mid 90’s to ?

Past success doesn't guarantee future success i agree.

A lot of our supporters think it will just happen because it did in the past.

 

[hk89]

Past success doesn't guarantee future success i agree.

A lot of our supporters think it will just happen because it did in the past.

That's true, but past success does seem to be a better predictor of future success than constant past failure. Making sure you have things in place to ensure short term failures don't become long term failures is the trick. Carlton have failed at this. Richmond failed at it for a long time before finally fixing it. I have no idea at this point if we've got the right people in place at the club now to ensure our current on field failures are not going to continue for 20+ years a la Carlton and Richmond (prior to 2017).

Clubs are more open these days to taking on board ex-players/admins from outside the club to help, but there still seems to be a tendency to look at past players for key roles (Carlton with Sos for example). It helps when you've won at least a flag every decade for the previous 5 decades in bringing in ex club people who have first hand experience at how to win one. Despite that, we've still made key external appointments at crucial moments, such as bringing n Clarko instead of Wallace or Ayres. Hopefully we continue to do so, but it is hard to be optimistic when you watch our brand of footy right now. I still think it is no worse than what we were producing for fans back in 2004 though, which is somewhat reassuring.

 

[Pessimistic]

That and it’s the ‘well run’ clubs which are sharing the spoils.

Richmond now is. Carlton Aren’t.

every supporter of clubs from the ‘haven’t list’ is secretly aware I am right

 

[MinerBoy]

That's true, but past success does seem to be a better predictor of future success than constant past failure. Making sure you have things in place to ensure short term failures don't become long term failures is the trick. Carlton have failed at this. Richmond failed at it for a long time before finally fixing it. I have no idea at this point if we've got the right people in place at the club now to ensure our current on field failures are not going to continue for 20+ years a la Carlton and Richmond (prior to 2017).

Clubs are more open these days to taking on board ex-players/admins from outside the club to help, but there still seems to be a tendency to look at past players for key roles (Carlton with Sos for example). It helps when you've won at least a flag every decade for the previous 5 decades in bringing in ex club people who have first hand experience at how to win one. Despite that, we've still made key external appointments at crucial moments, such as bringing n Clarko instead of Wallace or Ayres. Hopefully we continue to do so, but it is hard to be optimistic when you watch our brand of footy right now. I still think it is no worse than what we were producing for fans back in 2014 though, which is somewhat reassuring.

I hope that meant 2004, and not 2014 lol.

 

[hk89]

I hope that meant 2004, and not 2014 lol.

Oops, yes, did mean 2004! Thanks, edited now.

 

[Ambrosia]

Hawthorn are bad the question is how bad. I for one don't think they are bad enough to go the full tear down ala Carlton 2015 rebuild which in this era of limited priority picks and free agency should be avoided if possible. I mean realistically how much more valuable is a top 2 pick then a top 5-8 pick in the grand scheme of things?

I'm a big believer that 30 is the new 28 in terms of footballing career which means 27/28 year olds shouldn't be looked at as incapable of being valuable contributors in 4 or 5 years to combine with the newly introduced youth. So if it were me I'd be hanging onto all of O'Meara, Wingard, Mitchell and Sicily.

 

[hk89]

Hawthorn are bad the question is how bad. I for one don't think they are bad enough to go the full tear down ala Carlton 2015 rebuild which in this era of limited priority picks and free agency should be avoided if possible. I mean realistically how much more valuable is a top 2 pick then a top 5-8 pick in the grand scheme of things?

The top couple of picks are a fair bit better than later first rounders. There is also a big difference in average number of years to get to 20 games for the top 2 picks, so they are often ready to go early compared to later picks. Pick 1 plays an average of 233 games and averages 2.5 years to get to a 20 game season. Pick 2 isn't massively far behind with 196 games played average and 2.9 years average to get to a 20 games season. Once you're in the 6-10 range though, average games has dropped to 124.8 and average years to get to a 20 game season has jumped to 6.7! It doesn't drop off that much after there though, so picks 11-20 are probably somewhat underrated compared to 6-10, with average games of 117.9 and 7.2 years average to get to a 20 game season (I imagine these averages to get to 20 game seasons are so high due to whatever method they are using to handle those who never produce a 20 game season).

These massive drop-offs from the top 2 or 3 picks is largely why you need to think carefully about how you handle your mid ladder finishes. Going to the draft with picks in the 6+ range is still somewhat of a dice roll compared to the top 3 picks. Hawthorn decided it was going to get more at the trade table than it was at the draft table with the relatively late picks it got from probably around 2007 onwards. We've taken a few mid range first rounders recently in Day (hopefully a hit from what we've seen so far) and DGB (still waiting). Unless some dramatic form turnaround happens, we'll be looking at our first top 3 pick in around 15 years, and you expect given our current state we'd be thereabouts for at least another year, maybe more.

I'm a big believer that 30 is the new 28 in terms of footballing career which means 27/28 year olds shouldn't be looked at as incapable of being valuable contributors in 4 or 5 years to combine with the newly introduced youth. So if it were me I'd be hanging onto all of O'Meara, Wingard, Mitchell and Sicily.

Yeah, its a tough call I think. Turning things around from the state we are in now in 4-5 years isn't impossible, but the last time we did it that quickly we had two priority picks (even if we did waste one), and supplemented with some other early picks from moving on players with value. We wasted quite a few picks too, so if we can avoid that and still get some of the hits we got lost time, 4-5 years isn't unreasonable even without trading the likes of Mitchell etc, but I think it would require a near perfect run on draft day over the next 2-3 years, and that never really happens - certainly didn't happen for us last time we were in this state, and only having a s**t load of picks saved us from missing the mark on the rebuild that led to 2008 and onwards. I don't like seeing players go, so I hope we can rebuild while holding onto all those you mentioned, but I'm doubtful that would be the best way of optimising our time-to-next-flag.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Past success doesn't guarantee future success i agree.

That's true, but past success does seem to be a better predictor of future success than constant past failure.

Seen the ad far too many times haha.

 

[Bombfire]

Mitchell is worth no more than a late 20s or early 30s pick and also dependent on his salary. Probably not worth more than 500k
He accumulates disposals and racks up big numbers but doesn't impact the play.

Mitchell, O’Meara and Wingard.
That’s a lot of coin to pay for a trio that quite frankly, make the Hawthorn landscape look uninspiring.

 

[Psicosis]

Caro - “hawks list management over the last 6 years is the worst there’s ever been”

 

[hawkman]

Caro - “hawks list management over the last 6 years is the worst there’s ever been”

List manager over that time now at Collingwood. They will be wanting Ned Guy back soon

 

[Scotland]

Now this is the place to highlight Hawthorn's list management inadequacies, but are we talking about the same Collingwood that is paying Adam Treloar $300k a year for 5 years to play for another club, gave away a 21 year old Rising Star winner for peanuts, is 16th with no first or second round pick in the upcoming draft, pays Mason Cox $550k a year and signed Chris Mayne because he looks like David Mundy? That Collingwood?

 

[WWSD]

Mitchell, O’Meara and Wingard.
That’s a lot of coin to pay for a trio that quite frankly, make the Hawthorn landscape look uninspiring.

Not after this year’s draft haul.

 

[Slysh]

Caro - “hawks list management over the last 6 years is the worst there’s ever been”

Isn't even the worst of the past 6 years

 

[HairyO]

Perhaps the lack of penetration and hurt factor these days see’s other clubs not overly concerned with the ball in his possession.
As far as a 1st rounder goes, which contender needs or could afford to add Mitchell and which lower ranked team would give up a top 10 pick for him ...

He has had the most inside 50s a couple of times this year. The whole team is struggling. Noone has had much in the way of penetration. We are last by a long way for Inside 50.

 

[HairyO]

I wonder what O’Meara thinks about his decision now? He chased success but now his old team is miles ahead.

Miles ahead ? In 14th and not contending yet again ? I bet he is distraught at his choice...

 

[Slysh]

I wonder what O’Meara thinks about his decision now? He chased success but now his old team is miles ahead.

Well as the Suns were not able to get him on the park and he is now plying consistent footy and has done for a few years he probably isn’t regretting missing out on a

checks notes

14th place team...

 

[TylerDurden]

Hawthorn are bad the question is how bad. I for one don't think they are bad enough to go the full tear down ala Carlton 2015 rebuild which in this era of limited priority picks and free agency should be avoided if possible. I mean realistically how much more valuable is a top 2 pick then a top 5-8 pick in the grand scheme of things?

I'm a big believer that 30 is the new 28 in terms of footballing career which means 27/28 year olds shouldn't be looked at as incapable of being valuable contributors in 4 or 5 years to combine with the newly introduced youth. So if it were me I'd be hanging onto all of O'Meara, Wingard, Mitchell and Sicily.

I'd be staggered if any of them were traded.
Quite happy to take pick 2, 20 and 21. Plus pick 2 in the MSD and PSD, and any free agent we may be able to jag.
There may also be Scrimshaw/ Impey type deals that could pop up that don't cost much.