Roast You didn't trade Sam Hayes, maybe not so muppetty after all

[Portology]

It's a conundrum but it's more frustrating than hopeless. Speaks to Ken's refusal to take risks... since SF 2014

At the risk of being that numpty playing Playstation type footy...

We get hammered at HO, but are only just below par on clearances, yet get a decent amount of I50s and a lot of MI but not so much the goals on the board.

Not in the stats but does that suggest we're getting a lower quality of I50 entries, downstream of not getting a lot of HO to advantage, so we're taking all those marks and missing shots from harder than average positions? And that clearances gathered by compromise rucks like Finlayson are making our numbers look more averagely respectable. "No Sh*t Sherlock" says "if you're not going to invest in a better quality of I50... straighter, faster entry... and maybe carry a bit of a carbon rod for a year or two around the ground... you'd better bloody well invest in better goalkicking skills". But we seem to be doing precisely neither of these things with Sam's career caught in the middle of Ken's refusal to contemplate a higher risk higher reward gameplan.

Another interesting outlier is that teams got an average number of FF against us but we're near bottom of the pile on FF. Again detail isn't there but IF we're giving away more frees in ruck trying to compete then our games otherwise are lower than average on total free kick count. The other thing it suggests as many here have maintained over the years it's more frees for us that aren't called that may be a systemic issue (Robbie, Charlie, etc) for reasons someone ought to be able to explain (umps) or address (coaches).

And finally it also means it might not be complete madness to contemplate trading Sam in an appropriate transaction for a Kozzie or a Rioli. They are not [PLAYERCARD]Sam Gray[/PLAYERCARD] or Jed or [PLAYERCARD]Sam Mayes[/PLAYERCARD] for goodness sake, and at least they'd be on the park unlike Fanta. It might be seen as a... different... way around that apparent conversion issue.

 

[El_Scorcho]

That's because most clubs draft elite talls when they are at the bottom of the ladder (bottom 5) and can afford to pump games into them while they are recruiting the midfield to deliver them the ball.

We've put effort into Marshall and Georgiades because they are as close as we've gotten to that elite talent.

Players drafted after pick 5 can still become elite AFL players, or even just good solid AFL players. But you actually have to develop them.

Max Gawn is making a case for being the greatest ruckman of all time and he was drafted at pick 34.

We've had issues with our ruck and key position stocks for Hinkley's entire reign, not because we had no access to elite talent, but because we specifically didn't value drafting or developing that talent and instead recruited very expensively through the trade and FA system.

Again, every other club can get this right. Every other club churns out AFL quality rucks and KPFs on a regular basis. We've had Marshall and Lobbe (for 1-2 years) drafted in the last 20 years.

 

[philthy05]

It's a conundrum but it's more frustrating than hopeless. Speaks to Ken's refusal to take risks... since SF 2014

At the risk of being that numpty playing Playstation type footy...

We get hammered at HO, but are only just below par on clearances, yet get a decent amount of I50s and a lot of MI but not so much the goals on the board.

Not in the stats but does that suggest we're getting a lower quality of I50 entries, downstream of not getting a lot of HO to advantage, so we're taking all those marks and missing shots from harder than average positions? And that clearances gathered by compromise rucks like Finlayson are making our numbers look more averagely respectable. "No Sh*t Sherlock" says "if you're not going to invest in a better quality of I50... straighter, faster entry... and maybe carry a bit of a carbon rod for a year or two around the ground... you'd better bloody well invest in better goalkicking skills". But we seem to be doing precisely neither of these things with Sam's career caught in the middle of Ken's refusal to contemplate a higher risk higher reward gameplan.

Another interesting outlier is that teams got an average number of FF against us but we're near bottom of the pile on FF. Again detail isn't there but IF we're giving away more frees in ruck trying to compete then our games otherwise are lower than average on total free kick count. The other thing it suggests as many here have maintained over the years it's more frees for us that aren't called that may be a systemic issue (Robbie, Charlie, etc) for reasons someone ought to be able to explain (umps) or address (coaches).

And finally it also means it might not be complete madness to contemplate trading Sam in an appropriate transaction for a Kozzie or a Rioli. They are not Sam Gray or Jed or Sam Mayes for goodness sake, and at least they'd be on the park unlike Fanta. It might be seen as a... different... way around that apparent conversion issue.

As I’ve long stated, Hinkleys gameplan is to push numbers between the arcs.

We get a large number of inside 50’s not by winning the football first, but by winning it back by making it very hard for them to navigate through those arcs.

Among the obvious downsides are that if teams work harder and retain possession of the ball it entirely negates hinkleys plan.

Also means that we have big numbers around contests, it’s crowded and more pressure on disposals = poorer ball use.

 

[klem22]

Players drafted after pick 5 can still become elite AFL players, or even just good solid AFL players. But you actually have to develop them.

Max Gawn is making a case for being the greatest ruckman of all time and he was drafted at pick 34.

We've had issues with our ruck and key position stocks for Hinkley's entire reign, not because we had no access to elite talent, but because we specifically didn't value drafting or developing that talent and instead recruited very expensively through the trade and FA system.

Again, every other club can get this right. Every other club churns out AFL quality rucks and KPFs on a regular basis. We've had Marshall and Lobbe (for 1-2 years) drafted in the last 20 years.

Hinkley is a Muppet he is not a coach who is going anywhere or takingg anyone anywhere. He has nullified and continually destroyed playing careers all the while sitting in his untouchable ivory tower.
This negative Muppet came to the fore years ago when port were handsomely in front of Geelong in a final only to see Port come out defensively after half time and go on to lose the match.
His philosophy is garbage he coaches inside an insular mind set and there is absolutely nothing on the horizon to suggest he will not emulate history next year.
Stuff you Koch.

 

[El_Scorcho]

As I’ve long stated, Hinkleys gameplan is to push numbers between the arcs.

We get a large number of inside 50’s not by winning the football first, but by winning it back by making it very hard for them to navigate through those arcs.

Among the obvious downsides are that if teams work harder and retain possession of the ball it entirely negates hinkleys plan.

Also means that we have big numbers around contests, it’s crowded and more pressure on disposals = poorer ball use.

Yep, and the better sides always manage to find the way through enough to outscore us. We get involved in a lot of scraps by design. It works against bad sides because they don't have the skills, composure, plan or confidence to get through our press. It doesn't work against better teams though, because they are good enough to take their chances and trust in their own gameplan enough to keep at us, knowing we'll give them enough chances to score.

 

[Jonts]

That's because most clubs draft elite talls when they are at the bottom of the ladder (bottom 5) and can afford to pump games into them while they are recruiting the midfield to deliver them the ball.

We've put effort into Marshall and Georgiades because they are as close as we've gotten to that elite talent.

Hayes was All Australian U18s twice

Thats elite you muppet

 

[Janus]

Hayes was All Australian U18s twice

Thats elite you muppet

Yep, that's why he went for a pick in the 40s in his draft year.

Players drafted after pick 5 can still become elite AFL players, or even just good solid AFL players. But you actually have to develop them.

Max Gawn is making a case for being the greatest ruckman of all time and he was drafted at pick 34.

We've had issues with our ruck and key position stocks for Hinkley's entire reign, not because we had no access to elite talent, but because we specifically didn't value drafting or developing that talent and instead recruited very expensively through the trade and FA system.

Again, every other club can get this right. Every other club churns out AFL quality rucks and KPFs on a regular basis. We've had Marshall and Lobbe (for 1-2 years) drafted in the last 20 years.

Gawn went late because he had ruptured his ACL in his draft year. Pick someone else. I'll pick one for you: Riley O'Brien from Adelaide.

2014 rookie draft, gets 2 games in 2016...but doesn't get to 'develop' by playing AFL games until 2019, where he averaged 33 hitouts, 15 disposals, 3 marks, 4 tackles and 4 clearances per game over 18 games.

Hayes was the 2017 draft, so he's 3 years behind O'Brien. Meaning they are developing at roughly the same rate.

Let's pick another one - Toby Nankervis. Drafted with Pick 35 in 2013 draft.

Sydney plays him for 5 games in 2015, and 7 games in 2016. He gets to Richmond and plays 24 games and wins a flag. But if you look at the 5 games that Nankervis played for Sydney, you'll see he averaged 8.4 hitouts, 7.8 disposals, 1.8 marks, 4 tackles and 1 clearance per game. Notice how there was effort? Then when he got to Richmond, he went for 24.7 hitouts, 14.8 disposals, 3.1 marks, 4 tackles and 2.8 clearances per game.

Incidentally, Teakle averaged 15 hitouts, 8.5 disposals, 1 mark, 5 tackles and 2 clearances per game in his two games. I said that he has more attributes to the way we want to play than Hayes does, and it's because he'll become a ruck in the way that Nankervis rucks - not really super dominant but a big tank that will get around the ground.

Imagine Teakle with a couple of AFL preseasons under his belt.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Gawn went late because he had ruptured his ACL in his draft year. Pick someone else. I'll pick one for you: Riley O'Brien from Adelaide.

2014 rookie draft, gets 2 games in 2016...but doesn't get to 'develop' by playing AFL games until 2019, where he averaged 33 hitouts, 15 disposals, 3 marks, 4 tackles and 4 clearances per game over 18 games.

Hayes was the 2017 draft, so he's 3 years behind O'Brien. Meaning they are developing at roughly the same rate.

Do you know the other interesting thing about Reilly O'Brien? When Sam Jacobs suffered a season ending injury in Round 2 in 2019, even though O'Brien only had two games of AFL experience under his belt and none since 2016, the Crows played him for every single game for the rest of that season. They didn't wait for him to have one bad game and then banish him back to the SANFL forever so Tex and Jenkins could share the ruck and rack up pressure acts.

 

[Bennie the Nurse]

I think Sam Hayes is still an excellent prospect…… he lost a full year through a knee reconstruction and another year through Covid…… he was given a fair crack last season but he obviously needed to improve his endurance and his defensive side. IMO he may be 25 before his tank is up to what is required and he understands his role better, have patience.
I doubt that the Club would trade him unless we got a ridiculous deal, but he does have Teakle and Visentini competing for the same spot.

 

[drcollossimo]

Do you know the other interesting thing about Reilly O'Brien? When Sam Jacobs suffered a season ending injury in Round 2 in 2019, even though O'Brien only had two games of AFL experience under his belt and none since 2016, the Crows played him for every single game for the rest of that season. They didn't wait for him to have one bad game and then banish him back to the SANFL forever so Tex and Jenkins could share the ruck and rack up pressure acts.

 

[JUSTWORK]

I will be amazed if Hayes doesn’t get traded for a pick outside the top 50.

We didn’t have ruckman and Hinkley still wouldn’t play him, why would he not demand a trade ?

 

[Jonts]

Come June next year Hayes will be playing good footy elsewhere and notroJanus himself will be claiming his improvement and pointing to some bullshit 0.1 stat improvement

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

****ing diabolical. This is like farting under the cloche that holds the shit sandwich that was season 2022.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Gawn went late because he had ruptured his ACL in his draft year. Pick someone else.

Okay, i'll pick every All Australian ruckman in the past 15 years apart from Naitanui, the only one drafted in the top 5.

Your excuses for us failing to develop tall forwards and ruckmen are garbage. Every other club does this all the time.

 

[PatientMental]

Gawn - pick 34
Natanui - pick 2
Grundy - pick 18
Ryder - pick 7
Goldstien - Pick 37
Sandilands - Rookie draft #33
Minson - pick 20
Cox - Rookie draft#28
Jamar - Rookie draft #6
Lade - Predraftee

 

[1954]

There was always the risk kern won't give a fat rat's clacker as to what shape the playing list will be in when he either gets the rissole or decides he has had enough, and his lack of game time for Hayes resulting in the player wanting out, and probably for peanuts, may be part of that scenario.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

Gawn went late because he had ruptured his ACL in his draft year. Pick someone else. I'll pick one for you: Riley O'Brien from Adelaide.

2014 rookie draft, gets 2 games in 2016...but doesn't get to 'develop' by playing AFL games until 2019, where he averaged 33 hitouts, 15 disposals, 3 marks, 4 tackles and 4 clearances per game over 18 games.

Yes but in 2017 and 2018 Adelaide were playing Sam Jacobs in the ruck. A ruckman with over 100 games of experience.

They weren't rucking a trio of Rory Sloane, Tex Walker and Josh Jenkins because Riley wasn't ready.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

Do you know the other interesting thing about Reilly O'Brien? When Sam Jacobs suffered a season ending injury in Round 2 in 2019, even though O'Brien only had two games of AFL experience under his belt and none since 2016, the Crows played him for every single game for the rest of that season. They didn't wait for him to have one bad game and then banish him back to the SANFL forever so Tex and Jenkins could share the ruck and rack up pressure acts.

Lol I should have read this before posting

 

[Janus]

Okay, i'll pick every All Australian ruckman in the past 15 years apart from Naitanui, the only one drafted in the top 5.

Your excuses for us failing to develop tall forwards and ruckmen are garbage. Every other club does this all the time.

Not sure why you’re picking All Australian rucks, cause Hayes is far from being one of them, but whatever.

Explain Alastair Clarkson and Marc Pittonet then.

Pittonet was Pick 50 in 2014, and under Clarkson only played 6 games in 5 years before being traded to Carlton.

Then you look at John Longmire and Darcy Cameron.

Cameron was Pick 48 in 2016 and played 1 game in three seasons for the Swans before being traded to Collingwood at the end of 2019. Collingwood then played him for 10 games in 2020 in his fourth year.

When you consider that Hayes lost an entire year with an ACL, he’s tracking exactly the same way as both those players. 7 games in what should be considered his fourth full year of football at the highest level is par for the course.

 

[rumoursofwinter]

Ruck Contests - DFS Australia

ADE BRL CAR COL ESS FRE GCS GEE GWS HAW MEL NTH PTA RIC STK SYD WBD WCE 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 AFL Ruck Contest data is available from the 2013 season onwards. HO% refers to the percentage of hitouts won by each player over the… Read More »Ruck Contests

dfsaustralia.com

Sam Hayes 49% is only behind Preuss, Darcy, Gawn and Ryder (and strangely Peter Wright) in percentage of Hitouts won in 2022.(equal with Witts and Cox)

Ladhams is 35%...Lycett 39%...Teakle 34% [PLAYERCARD]Luke Jackson[/PLAYERCARD] 33%.

	RC	HO	HO%	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	25	26	27
[PLAYERCARD]Jeremy Finlayson[/PLAYERCARD]	614	123	20	28	26			20	5	4	3	4	12	13		65	49	51	45	54	42	67	69	21	63	54
Sam Hayes	422	205	49					57	81	74	82	70	74	65
[PLAYERCARD]Charlie Dixon[/PLAYERCARD]	319	90	28											7		34	17	41	46	39	55	26	26	13	27	34
[PLAYERCARD]Scott Lycett[/PLAYERCARD]	249	96	39	63	65	74	63
[PLAYERCARD]Sam Powell-Pepper[/PLAYERCARD]	115	21	18	0	0	0	0	9	6	17	14	20	10	15		0	5	7	0	1	0	6	1	5	8	9
[PLAYERCARD]Todd Marshall[/PLAYERCARD]	109	18	17	9	9	24	35	14	8	1	1	1	1	0		0	0	0	8	0	1	0	4		1	3
Brynn Teakle	89	30	34														30							61
Ollie Wines	11	3	27	0	0	0	0		0	0	0	4	2	0		0	0	1	0	2	1	1	0	0	0	0

 

[Janus]

Just to make this point clear - since 2018 when Hayes has been on our list, he has done his ACL to wipe out one season and we've finished first and second on the ladder in another two seasons. We also were getting games into Ladhams during that time.

When given the opportunity this year, Hayes got 7 games which is about the standard number for a ruck who is just getting started.

Hayes is developing just fine.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

Just to make this point clear - since 2018 when Hayes has been on our list, he has done his ACL to wipe out one season and we've finished first and second on the ladder in another two seasons. We also were getting games into Ladhams during that time.

When given the opportunity this year, Hayes got 7 games which is about the standard number for a ruck who is just getting started.

Hayes is developing just fine.

Do you think he will be at Port next year?

 

[philthy05]

Just to make this point clear - since 2018 when Hayes has been on our list, he has done his ACL to wipe out one season and we've finished first and second on the ladder in another two seasons. We also were getting games into Ladhams during that time.

When given the opportunity this year, Hayes got 7 games which is about the standard number for a ruck who is just getting started.

Hayes is developing just fine.

**** off let’s not even pretend Hinkley has any kind of plan

The ruck situation was a shitshow. We swapped first ruck so many times.

We played Hayes, we played Dixon, we played teakle we played finlayson. It was all over the shop.

It was being made up as they went along.

The mental gymnastics needed to defend that. **** off.

We finished 11th and burnt our developing young ruck by dropping him, publicly calling him not good enough, then never brought him back while fielding a ruck group that got smacked on their way to a losing season. The ruck that we backed while trading a ruck the off-season before.

It was nothing less than a cluster****.

We could have gotten more games into Hayes, publicly backed him and given him confidence while he improves and builds his tank and what the hell would we have lost?

In 2024, when the next coach takes over he could have been handed a team with a 24/25 yr old ruck with 40 + games under his belt and about to come into his prime with rozee butters and Marshall.

Now we’re odds on chance to lose Hayes and apparently the only reason we haven’t made the biggest off-season blunder ever by taking on grundys crippling contract that would burn our ability to build a team for the next coach was because Grundy likes melb. **** me.

And now next year we could be fielding a useless lycett while Dante isn’t ready and 2024 gonna hand over a team to a new coach with no ruck but Dante and teakle who would have maybe sub 10 games between them at that stage.

Lol.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

* off let’s not even pretend Hinkley has any kind of plan

The ruck situation was a shitshow. We swapped first ruck so many times.

We played Hayes, we played Dixon, we played teakle we played finlayson. It was all over the shop.

It was being made up as they went along.

The mental gymnastics needed to defend that. * off.

We finished 11th and burnt our developing young ruck by dropping him, publicly calling him not good enough, then never brought him back while fielding a ruck group that got smacked on their way to a losing season. The ruck that we backed while trading a ruck the off-season before.

It was nothing less than a cluster*.

We could have gotten more games into Hayes, publicly backed him and given him confidence while he improves and builds his tank and what the hell would we have lost?

In 2024, when the next coach takes over he could have been handed a team with a 24/25 yr old ruck with 40 + games under his belt and about to come into his prime with rozee butters and Marshall.

Now we’re odds on chance to lose Hayes and apparently the only reason we haven’t made the biggest off-season blunder ever by taking on grundys crippling contract that would burn our ability to build a team for the next coach was because Grundy likes melb. * me.

And now next year we could be fielding a useless lycett while Dante isn’t ready and 2024 gonna hand over a team to a new coach with no ruck but Dante and teakle who would have maybe sub 10 games between them at that stage.

Lol.

Its almost like Ken is trying to leave the list in the worst possible state, so that the next coach gets called worse than him.

 

[TazD]

Its almost like Ken is trying to leave the list in the worst possible state, so that the next coach gets called worse than him.

Carn, you make Ken sound like some kind of small, petty, and vindictive fraud.