Analysis Came good after written off

[SJ]

I 100% agree that a turning point for Hawkins was his return to the forward line full time. However I recall the genesis of his move to the ruck somewhat differently (although I can't find an article in Google archives to support it) in that the club was so disillusioned with his form that they threw him into the ruck to try to 'get his hands on the ball' and give him some confidence. I recall an article at some point during the experiment where Hawkins was talking positively of the move, saying that he had thrived given the run on the ball and was hoping he could translate this back to good form at full forward (again, I can't find the article online).

FWIW, I also don't think there was any intention to keep Hawkins as a ruck-forward indefinitely. My recollection was it was transparently a move made to improve his confidence/form before a move back to where he was clearly suited better.

Straight from the Robert Walls playbook.

Strange thing is that this time it seems to have actually worked.

Well I disagree, Hawkins was in the 22 at the end of 2009 and played a role in the premiership.

Podsiadly was drafted at the end of 2009. Hawkins started 2010 where he left off in the forward line. Mooney was suspended in Round 2 and thus Podsiadly came for him in Round 3. Mooney returned the following week, and all three of them played in the forward line (with both Blake and Ottens rucking) in Rounds 4-6.

It is true that within these weeks, Podsiadly (10 goals) and Mooney (eight) out-performed the younger Hawkins (two), but it was hardly surprising that there was not quite room for them all.

Then Ottens got injured and missed nine weeks, without being replaced by a ruckman - instead Hawkins moved to the second ruck role (his hitout numbers immediately soar in Round 7) and hit the scoreboard with four goals in Rounds 8 and 10. However, these were both in huge wins against meagre opposition. He then suffered a flare up in his foot and missed two months, before playing out the rest of the season in the same role with minimal impact. The same trend was seen in the first three months of 2011 before he was dropped, and then returned as a key forward in Round 17.

 

[SJ]

In the post-Ottens era:

Average difference between Geelong and opposition hitouts:

2012: -5.4 (ranked 14th) - West (21 games), Stephenson (8), Simpson (2)
2013: -7.2 (ranked 16th) - Simpson (6), West (13), Vardy (10), Blicavs (22)
2014: +0.1 (ranked 10th) - Simpson (13), McIntosh (19), Blicavs (23)

I'm not sure what "that argument" is, but I know that you will agree that these stats tend to indicate things took a turn for the better in 2014.

West rucked most of 2012 on his own, so I don't really think that metric is fair on him.

 

[catempire]

West rucked most of 2012 on his own, so I don't really think that metric is fair on him.

It's the age-old argument - he did OK with the attributes he had but he wasn't what we needed as a number 1 ruckman. As a supporting ruckman, he was suited well: see 2011 in support of Ottens.

 

[SJ]

It's the age-old argument - he did OK with the attributes he had but he wasn't what we needed as a number 1 ruckman. As a supporting ruckman, he was suited well: see 2011 in support of Ottens.

Well I agree with you, but I also think he was 'good enough' in 2012 - the reason we were deficient in the ruck was because we had no one else.

Had we had two Wests in 2012 we would have been ranked higher than 14th.

 

[goyoucatters]

I would have taken West of 2012 over McIntosh of 2014 and I jumped off the West bandwagon in his final seasons but 10 disposals per game, 24.5 hitouts, 3 marks, 2.5 tackles, 1 clearance, 0.4 goals/0.3 direct assists versus 14 disposals, 20 hitouts, 4 marks, 2.5 tackles, 2 clearances, 0.4 goals/0.5 direct assists per game and we are talking about a bloke who only stood 198cm in comparison to 203cm.

Based on the stats you posted, it would have to be a close-run thing.

The figures are actually remarkably similar.

 

[catempire]

Well I agree with you, but I also think he was 'good enough' in 2012 - the reason we were deficient in the ruck was because we had no one else.

Had we had two Wests in 2012 we would have been ranked higher than 14th.

Not just no one else though, no #1 ruckman. I don't think another West would have helped.

 

[SJ]

Not just no one else though, no #1 ruckman. I don't think another West would have helped.

Well at the very least another West would have been better than seven games of Josh Walker in the ruck.

 

[catempire]

Well at the very least another West would have been better than seven games of Josh Walker in the ruck.

Probably the only thing we'll agree on in this debate!

 

[dazbroncos]

You might as well - everyone else does.

Fascinating how many mindreaders there are around here isn't it?

Cant read what aint there…

Now arseholes on the other hand… they ARE everywhere….

GO Catters

 

[Cataholic]

Cant read what aint there…

Now arseholes on the other hand… they ARE everywhere….

GO Catters

Like opinions

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Totally agree. Vardy's knee no one could have predicted. But McIntosh and Simpson are a different matter.

Incidentally the durable West did ACL last season.

Always thought he was a serviceable workhorse but was not ecstatic nor disappointed he left.

He was iirc keen for the fresh start, seems like one of those situations where both parties were happy to move on.

 

[Topper Harley]

Yep. Two match committee decisions that could/would have been the difference in a game that went down to the wire.

Enright and Caddy not getting injured before half time would have been nice too.

That game was a magical combination of poor management and poor luck, how we got so close is a mystery.

 

[Teriyakicat]

In the post-Ottens era:

Average difference between Geelong and opposition hitouts:

2012: -5.4 (ranked 14th) - West (21 games), Stephenson (8), Simpson (2)
2013: -7.2 (ranked 16th) - Simpson (6), West (13), Vardy (10), Blicavs (22)
2014: +0.1 (ranked 10th) - Simpson (13), McIntosh (19), Blicavs (23)

I'm not sure what "that argument" is, but I know that you will agree that these stats tend to indicate things took a turn for the better in 2014.

I reckon it'd be handy if we could access stats for effective hitouts. When I did see stats for H/O efficiency in our Sunday papers, Simpson's EH/O % was quite high compared to many other opposition ruckmen whose stats I was able to find. Not sure how his stats stacked up over the course of the season as I wasn't always able to find them. McIntosh wasn't too shabby, either, IIRC.

 

[Vdubs]

Yes I hope he can stay on the Park a bit more this year. Noticed a fair bit of (non-Cat) criticism of Caddy on BF which was unwarranted. Got to stop lurking on Bay 13!

I never go there tbh, but from what you say, I'm glad.

 

[catempire]

I reckon it'd be handy if we could access stats for effective hitouts. When I did see stats for H/O efficiency in our Sunday papers, Simpson's EH/O % was quite high compared to many other opposition ruckmen whose stats I was able to find. Not sure how his stats stacked up over the course of the season as I wasn't always able to find them. McIntosh wasn't too shabby, either, IIRC.

No doubt, raw hitouts are a very crude measure of effectiveness of a ruckman. Unfortunately we don't have much more to go on than our own subjective views of things.

 

[Teriyakicat]

Cant read what aint there…

Now arseholes on the other hand… they ARE everywhere….

GO Catters

Like opinions

Lol
I think the quote might actually be 'opinions are like arseholes- everyone's got one'

 

[manboob]

That game was a magical combination of poor management and poor luck, how we got so close is a mystery.

Norf.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Norf.

Do it properly #lolnorf

 

[Cattery]

There must have been hundreds of hours of collective analysis put into the debate at the time. To write it off as merely "bias", "prejudice" or allegations of spuddery (and nothing more), is wilfully misrepresenting things.

Moving on now...

Not wanting to ignite this debate all over again, but "willfully misrepresenting" things? Who exactly is guilty of that?

 

[catempire]

Not wanting to ignite this debate all over again, but "willfully misrepresenting" things? Who exactly is guilty of that?

It's there in the sentence you quote.

 

[Partridge]

Finals included.

Barring some medical miracles, we probably won't have a ruckman in 2015 that satisfies all of the criteria either. The hope is that the combination of players we will have will provide what we need. Hopefully then in 2016 we can turn over a new leaf.

I wonder what the hitout stats from 2013 were, with and without West in the team?

 

[catempire]

I wonder what the hitout stats from 2013 were, with and without West in the team?

In the six games Simpson played they were bloody good. Apart from that, without even checking, I'd guess they were terrible.

 

[Cattery]

It's there in the sentence you quote.

Myself and/or Partridge?

 

[Partridge]

In the six games Simpson played they were bloody good. Apart from that, without even checking, I'd guess they were terrible.

I got a hell of a shock when I checked the games Simpson played (these are purely hitout stats):

With Simpson (6 games)
Won 3 Lost 3 - Differential +9 = +1.5 per game

With West (13 games)
Won 6 Lost 7 - Differential -52 = -4 per game

Without Simpson (19 games)
Won 6 Lost 13 - Differential -188 = -9.9 per game

Without West (12 games)
Won 3 Lost 9 - Differential -127 = -10.5 per game

Without Simpson or West (6 games)
Won 0 Lost 6 - Differential -136 = -22.6 per game

It's striking that when our clear number 1 in Simpson and clear number 2 in West were both fit, they never played together. We were competitive with Simpson, just about competitive with West, moderate to poor without either, and absolutely horrific without both.

 

[dazbroncos]

I got a hell of a shock when I checked the games Simpson played (these are purely hitout stats):

With Simpson (6 games)
Won 3 Lost 3 - Differential +9 = +1.5 per game

With West (13 games)
Won 6 Lost 7 - Differential -52 = -4 per game

Without Simpson (19 games)
Won 6 Lost 13 - Differential -188 = -9.9 per game

Without West (12 games)
Won 3 Lost 9 - Differential -127 = -10.5 per game

Without Simpson or West (6 games)
Won 0 Lost 6 - Differential -136 = -22.6 per game

It's striking that when our clear number 1 in Simpson and clear number 2 in West were both fit, they never played together. We were competitive with Simpson, just about competitive with West, moderate to poor without either, and absolutely horrific without both.

Makes you wonder what might have been… a recognised #1 ruck playing (man mountain) as a # 1 ruck, and a good mobile #2 ruck playing as a #2 ruck.

Novel concept aint it. If we can figure it out……

GO Catters