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

[ChappyUK]

Sicily would net an end of first round compensation pick if he left at the end of next year as a free agent.

You would only get rid of him if you had a ready-made replacement. Current form says you don't.

Mitchell is the only one with currency and it's fading fast.

 

[WWSD]

You would only get rid of him if you had a ready-made replacement. Current form says you don't.

Mitchell is the only one with currency and it's fading fast.

Sicily would have a higher market value than Mitchell, despite his injury. It depends what type of players teams value more i guess.

 

[Pessimistic]

Hawthorn haven’t always been a well run club as I am sure you a well aware. As you will remember the club went from a powerhouse to being the junior partner for in a merger within 5 years in the early ‘90’s.

It is highly unlikely that anything that dramatic will happen again, but it shows what can happen.

that’s recent enough to suggest everyone is aware and not be repeated.

weren’t an off field powerhouse back then, small and agile though

Many would say the merger went part way to making the club what it is today. It easily passed through issues such as the 02-05 on field slump

 

[Gavin Excell]

that’s recent enough to suggest everyone is aware and not be repeated.

weren’t an off field powerhouse back then, small and agile though

Many would say the merger went part way to making the club what it is today. It easily passed through issues such as the 02-05 on field slump

When was the "gold taps in the boardroom" period?

 

[HairyO]

Did you catch the score on the weekend? Who’s future do you think looks better right now?

You think GCS has a future?

No members. No supporters. No success.

This is about as intelligent as Carlton supporters mocking Hawthorn's player management.

 

[Pessimistic]

When was the "gold taps in the boardroom" period?

Point taken we definitely werent in the cabal of clubs that the AFL guaranteed financially even though they were in deeper financial doodoo
Having said that Im definitely not in the group that regularly wants to cull clubs.

But maybe apply the maybloom test. If they go 35 years on the tap but no flag...out they go

 

[Gavin Excell]

Point taken we definitely werent in the cabal of clubs that the AFL guaranteed financially even though they were in deeper financial doodoo
Having said that Im definitely not in the group that regularly wants to cull clubs.

But maybe apply the maybloom test. If they go 35 years on the tap but no flag...out they go

I had heard that gold taps reference years ago as an indicator of hawks excessive expenditure. Not sure if real or urban myth though

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

I had heard that gold taps reference years ago as an indicator of hawks excessive expenditure. Not sure if real or urban myth though

It wasn't excessive, not like they were pure gold or anything (would taint the water). Just gold plated!

In the 80s we were spending money we just didn't have. We were a North sized club trying (and beating) the big-4 at their own game.

The financial drain took a long time to crawl out of - a good deal of our time in the wilderness (93-07) could be in part put down to trying to fix the financial burden through austerity measures.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

‘Richmond is the best example of success mainly on draftees. Discuss how they have traded into the draft

Yeah, we haven't. We got a handful of high draft picks about 10 years ago (Cotch, Dusty, Vlastuin, Rance, Jack) and then surrounded them with lots of really low draft or rookie list picks (Short, Grimes, Astbury, KMac, Castagna, Broad etc.) and rare few trades (Nank, Prestia, Caddy, Maric pre-flags). And one free agent.

Maybe our scouts were really good at it, or maybe we've just got lucky. Probably a fair pinch of both I reckon.

 

[boncer34]

This is a perfect example why the FA compensation is wrong IMO.

Hawthorn will finish 15-18 this year - "earning" a top-5 pick.

FA Compensation for losing a FA on say a 3yr, 600k = compensation pick after club's first round pick.

Breust, Gunston, JOM, Mitchell could all conceivably generate that kind of contract offer.

Would any club trade a top-5 pick for one of them? No - even a late 1st (15-20) is pushing it.

If Hawthorn 'knew' they were going to finish bottom 4 next year, it would be in their best interest to not re-sign any of their senior players - encourage them all to explore FA at end of 22 and "generate" multiple top-10 picks.

If Hawthorn stood to significantly benefit from the rort, it might almost be enough for the AFL to change the rules.

Adelaide didn't get one for Crouch

 

[H00t]

The answer to the question was determined from the moment the thread was started.

Yeah we can succeed ignoring the elite end of the draft as shown from our 2009 debacle to 2013-15. We had that much talent on our list that we could ignore early picks and take underrated/ passed it players from other clubs and turn them into gems (Hale, Gibson, Lake etc.) and use late draft picks for players as we already had a wealth of talent.

However from the 2016 we had already ignored the draft since 2008. Our champions were on their last legs and the younger players around them were never going to get to the level required. Roughy’s cancer was in full swing and he was never going to be the same player again.

Our list was more holey than Swiss cheese. As a result of topping up from for the 3 peat. We had nearly no young talent at all coming through. Skipping the draft for pretty much 8 years straight will do that. Then we decided to make it 11 for some crazy reason.

We forgot how to develop a list. Started trying to overpay for young talent with draft picks because our list was so unbalanced. Which is an awful idea and just set us back years. More than the 2-3 that it took to realise our position.

Instead of using Mitchell, Lewis and Hodge to teach a raft of young draft picks we sent them packing for chips. Ruined our draft hand for 3 years. Ignored bargain basement pick ups in favour of overpriced fool’s gold. We could have had Amon for nothing but traded the world for Wingard.

Draft picks are how you build a list. A lot of luck and hard work goes in after that but the draft is how you build a winning list. Topping up only works after the foundations are set. Otherwise it’s just going to topple in on itself. As many draft picks as possible to get the best players you can. Any other way of getting absolute elite talent just isn’t worth it. Especially when essentially starting from scratch.

The results the hawks have gotten from the mismanagement of 2016 onwards is completely unsurprising. It was the way it was always going to happen.

 

[Gavin Excell]

The answer to the question was determined from the moment the thread was started.

Yeah we can succeed ignoring the elite end of the draft as shown from our 2009 debacle to 2013-15. We had that much talent on our list that we could ignore early picks and take underrated/ passed it players from other clubs and turn them into gems (Hale, Gibson, Lake etc.) and use late draft picks for players as we already had a wealth of talent.

However from the 2016 we had already ignored the draft since 2008. Our champions were on their last legs and the younger players around them were never going to get to the level required. Roughy’s cancer was in full swing and he was never going to be the same player again.

Our list was more holey than Swiss cheese. As a result of topping up from for the 3 peat. We had nearly no young talent at all coming through. Skipping the draft for pretty much 8 years straight will do that. Then we decided to make it 11 for some crazy reason.

We forgot how to develop a list. Started trying to overpay for young talent with draft picks because our list was so unbalanced. Which is an awful idea and just set us back years. More than the 2-3 that it took to realise our position.

Instead of using Mitchell, Lewis and Hodge to teach a raft of young draft picks we sent them packing for chips. Ruined our draft hand for 3 years. Ignored bargain basement pick ups in favour of overpriced fool’s gold. We could have had Amon for nothing but traded the world for Wingard.

Draft picks are how you build a list. A lot of luck and hard work goes in after that but the draft is how you build a winning list. Topping up only works after the foundations are set. Otherwise it’s just going to topple in on itself. As many draft picks as possible to get the best players you can. Any other way of getting absolute elite talent just isn’t worth it. Especially when essentially starting from scratch.

The results the hawks have gotten from the mismanagement of 2016 onwards is completely unsurprising. It was the way it

You're not Bradkil?

 

[Bradkli]

The answer to the question was determined from the moment the thread was started.

Yeah we can succeed ignoring the elite end of the draft as shown from our 2009 debacle to 2013-15. We had that much talent on our list that we could ignore early picks and take underrated/ passed it players from other clubs and turn them into gems (Hale, Gibson, Lake etc.) and use late draft picks for players as we already had a wealth of talent.

However from the 2016 we had already ignored the draft since 2008. Our champions were on their last legs and the younger players around them were never going to get to the level required. Roughy’s cancer was in full swing and he was never going to be the same player again.

Our list was more holey than Swiss cheese. As a result of topping up from for the 3 peat. We had nearly no young talent at all coming through. Skipping the draft for pretty much 8 years straight will do that. Then we decided to make it 11 for some crazy reason.

We forgot how to develop a list. Started trying to overpay for young talent with draft picks because our list was so unbalanced. Which is an awful idea and just set us back years. More than the 2-3 that it took to realise our position.

Instead of using Mitchell, Lewis and Hodge to teach a raft of young draft picks we sent them packing for chips. Ruined our draft hand for 3 years. Ignored bargain basement pick ups in favour of overpriced fool’s gold. We could have had Amon for nothing but traded the world for Wingard.

Draft picks are how you build a list. A lot of luck and hard work goes in after that but the draft is how you build a winning list. Topping up only works after the foundations are set. Otherwise it’s just going to topple in on itself. As many draft picks as possible to get the best players you can. Any other way of getting absolute elite talent just isn’t worth it. Especially when essentially starting from scratch.

The results the hawks have gotten from the mismanagement of 2016 onwards is completely unsurprising. It was the way it

But but we made a prelim in 2018.....

 

[WWSD]

Jackson Callow (Key forward) and Jai Newcombe (midfielder). The rebuild has now begun.

 

[Slysh]

Jackson Callow (Key forward) and Jai Newcombe (midfielder). The rebuild has now begun.

Well it begun two years ago, hopefully both can be part of the future though.

 

[Scotland]

But but we made a prelim in 2018.....

Did you?

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Jackson Callow (Key forward) and Jai Newcombe (midfielder). The rebuild has now begun.

Four year deal for Newcombe seems like overkill. Will be interesting to see how he develops. Huge investment.

 

[Freomaniac]

I admire your persistence in arguing a poor idea was a good one.

Crazy is believing that an old, experienced team at the end of a successful run (that had been topped up along the way to get where it was) can be topped up by replacing HOF calibre players overnight. People get wayyy too excited about 'premiership players'. There's rarely anything remarkable about the bottom 5-10 players of any premiership side.

Think West coast in 2006-7.

2006: Eagles win the flag and Drew Banfield retired.....

2007: Eagles get top 4. Eagles out in straight sets. Yes you lost Judd and Cousins. thats 2 Brownlow medal winners. Michael Braun, Daniel Chick and Rowan Jones left as well. Thats 5 experienced players that played in that 2006 side.

 

[Freomaniac]

Suggest its more the system that caught up with them
When you win flags you simply don't get access to high draft picks

My thoughts exactly....

Equalization.... You make finals, that means you dont get early picks for quality youth, Unless you are willing to trade something for a top 10 pick.

Freo made finals from 2012-15. Take a look on who freo got in those 1st rounders....

2012 Josh Simpson at pick 12. Talented but didnt have the drive or motivation to become an AFL player.

2013: Michael Apeness at pick 17. Made sense at the time to get him. A kpf/ruck. Freo had next to nothing outside of and Ageing Matthew Pavlich. Had his career stuffed with multiple knee injuries

2014: Lachie Weller at pick 14. Talented kid. Somehow freo got pick 2 for him in 2017, Which Freo used on Brayshaw.

2015: Had no 1st rounder. Traded pick 16 and 34 for Harley Bennell and pick 22 which turned out to be Darcy tucker. Gutted with Bennells issues and injuries. Tucker has been a solid B grade mid.



I will savour every final under Ross Lyon in that period, even the losses.

 

[hawkman]

Four year deal for Newcombe seems like overkill. Will be interesting to see how he develops. Huge investment.

We have worse players on our list that have been there for more than 3 yeaes

 

[Scotland]

Think West coast in 2006-7.

2006: Eagles win the flag and Drew Banfield retired.....

2007: Eagles get top 4. Eagles out in straight sets. Yes you lost Judd and Cousins. thats 2 Brownlow medal winners. Michael Braun, Daniel Chick and Rowan Jones left as well. Thats 5 experienced players that played in that 2006 side.

Not really comparable. Drew Banfield was a solid player for a long period, but if Mark Nicoski hadn't got injured it's iffy he would've even been in the side in 2006. Guys like Braun, Fletcher, Hunter, Stenglein played a few years after 2006 but dropped off.

Our 2006 flag side was pretty young. Judd, Kerr, Cox, Glass 23-25 and 100+ games experience. Cousins 28, Wirrpanda 27, reasonable to expect those guys would play at a high level for a while yet. Obviously things didn't pan out (Cousins sacked, Judd trade, Kerr injury, Wirra retired young etc.) but that's footy. In a parallel universe with Judd for his whole career we probably do a Carlton and hover around 5th-8th for a few years then drop off. The cliff came quickly and getting Kennedy in the Judd trade, Naitanui and Shuey from sucking, Gaff and Darling etc. helped set us up for the mid to late 2010s.

WC 2006 are more comparable to Hawthorn 2008. Crawford the only player over 30, Franklin, Lewis, Hodge, Mitchell, Roughead etc. all early to mid 20s with 80-100+ games experience. That side won a flag which came earlier than most thought it would, then spent a couple of years as a good but not great side while some more pieces were added. Took them years to replace Croad with Lake which was pivotal. Then 3peat and 4 GFs a row and inevitable decline.

If you wanted to compare WC and Hawthorn then Haw 2016 are in a similar position to WC now. Is there enough in our 27/28 and under tank to warrant trading away our draft future for the next couple of years? I would say no, assuming that players like Dusty, Bont, Petracca etc. aren't serious options. But there's a whole 'WC 2021' thread for that. We've been recruiting for the 2020s for about 5 years, our issue is not converting 2019 and 2020 into more successful seasons.

 

[Scotland]

Sicily would have a higher market value than Mitchell, despite his injury. It depends what type of players teams value more i guess.

If Sicily is a free agent then his 'value' is determined by that. A team that wants him is likely to offer enough money to get the compo to tick over to band 2 rather than have to trade. I don't see anyone significantly upgrading that compo pick in a trade.

Mitchell would have to be traded. Under contract so some leverage there but limited market. I wonder if a team like Carlton that thinks they are close to success would give up any young assets to get a player in his prime like Mitchell. Not McKay or Walsh obviously, but a Dow, SPS, whoever...

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

We have worse players on our list that have been there for more than 3 yeaes

I just think it was an unnecessary investment. He looks like a very good prospect.

 

[TylerDurden]

Four year deal for Newcombe seems like overkill. Will be interesting to see how he develops. Huge investment.

It's actually 2.5 years. Media had it wrong.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

It's actually 2.5 years. Media had it wrong.

There you go. That’s far more reasonable.