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

[TylerDurden]

Some one had to defend ross Lyon at freo. Saying that Ross Lyon got the best out of a very limited Freo squad from 2012-15, even if he had to play a defensive style. Freos forward line was Pavlich as FF a 188 cm tall Chris Mayne at CHF, Ballantyne and walters at forward pockets and 2 random midfielders on a forward flank.

Then you look at hawks forward line in that 2013 afl grand final. Roughead at FF, Franklin at CHF.. rioli and puoplo at forward pockets, Hale and bruest at forward flanks and Gunston on tje bench.

Ironically Gunner was the one who kicked 4 on the day. Bud had one foot out the door, as we soon found out.

 

[Freomaniac]

Accurate it was a 3 point difference?

20 to 22 scoring shots.

Obv there was some out of bounds on the fulls but that's the fault of the footballer, finishing is more than half of the skill of being good.

I was also gutted about that 2015 preliminary final as well.

Hawks kicked 15.4.94 to freos 10.7.67.

Hawks did not miss a shot in that game. All 4 behinds were rushed.

 

[Dewyyyyy]

I was also gutted about that 2015 preliminary final as well.

Hawks kicked 15.4.94 to freos 10.7.67.

Hawks did not miss a shot in that game. All 4 behinds were rushed.

Again it's apart of football, you've gotta be good enough to finish not just create.

 

[Freomaniac]

Hawks fan bashing thread, mostly. Flavor Aid (Not Kool-Aid, know your history) sales have definitely declined since 2018.

Ross Lyon bashing was Ross Lyon bashing because he coached dour footy. He would've taken a forward line with Franklin, Roughead, Rioli, Gunston, Breust (and Mark Williams early days) and turned Hawthorn into a team that tries to win finals scoring 60 or 70 points.

Again, this is inaccurate. Had Ross Lyon had guys like buddy, roughy, Cyril, breust and Gunston in a forward line, that Ross Lyon forward line would easily average 100-120 points a game.

You want futher proof? Look at Ross Lyon saints side of 2009.

Scored 2197 points in the regular season with the likes of Kosi, Riewoldt, Milne and Schneider up Forward.

 

[Freomaniac]

Surely the trajectory is now upwards ?? On your 7 year cycle time-frame the Hawks will salute next year

A lot of draft capital was wasted, yes- some good examples there - but a lot you struck gold.Your always going to have some misses. It was both the quantity and quality of picks that is lacking for the Hawks this time around. And that is what makes it so much more difficult to re-create what happened then now.
Clarkson himself mentioned this throughout his last couple of years of coaching. It explains why he was very reluctant to rebuild again. And probably to a degree explains why they felt the need to move him on!!

Nothing is ever certain though.

But you bolded the quality and quantity of the picks.

Give you an example.

Say if freo finished 15th and have picks 4 and 40 as the 1st and 3rd rounders.

Your saints get 8th and lose an Elim final. Your picks are picks 11, 29 and 47.

Say if the saints like a promising KPF or mid that they like and know he will still be there at pic 4 but already gone by pick 11, you willing to trade picks 11, 29 and 47 for picks 4 and 40?

You get pick 4 yet freo has 3 mid pics to get more youth.

Interesting how some teams do their rebuilds.

Not exactly the worst idea in the world down grading pick 5 for pick 10 in exchange to getting another mid 2nd or future 2nd

 

[Jack Green]

Nothing is ever certain though.

But you bolded the quality and quantity of the picks.

Give you an example.

Say if freo finished 15th and have picks 4 and 40 as the 1st and 3rd rounders.

Your saints get 8th and lose an Elim final. Your picks are picks 11, 29 and 47.

Say if the saints like a promising KPF or mid that they like and know he will still be there at pic 4 but already gone by pick 11, you willing to trade picks 11, 29 and 47 for picks 4 and 40?

You get pick 4 yet freo has 3 mid pics to get more youth.

Interesting how some teams do their rebuilds.

Not exactly the worst idea in the world down grading pick 5 for pick 10 in exchange to getting another mid 2nd or future 2nd

No , a bit like real estate , it's not an exact science the draft. But for this thread, Hawthorn by strategy for many years avoided the top end of the draft . The results have been shown for the last few years , and IMO for the next few years. Richmond's strategy in a similar position has been different hasn't it??

2 years on from 3 flags in 4 years they had 5 picks inside 30 and recruited 5 teenagers. Compare that to Hawthorn 2-3 years on from a three -peat and giving away first round picks and their best young player for established talent. I do think Richmond will not win any more flags with this group. Suspect they may squeeze the 8, but may miss out. Their strategy with an eye for future years rather than the now though however, may allow them to bounce back quicker than either the Lions post 2005 or Hawks post 2015.

 

[Scotland]

Again, this is inaccurate. Had Ross Lyon had guys like buddy, roughy, Cyril, breust and Gunston in a forward line, that Ross Lyon forward line would easily average 100-120 points a game.

You want futher proof? Look at Ross Lyon saints side of 2009.

Scored 2197 points in the regular season with the likes of Kosi, Riewoldt, Milne and Schneider up Forward.

4th in points for, 16th by a mile in points against. Racking up scores while keeping bottom 8 sides to 40 or 50 points doesn't win you flags.

With Riewoldt, Koschitzke, Milne, Schneider and goalkicking mids Dal Santo and Goddard. I also wouldn't call a GF team with Pavlich (career best 72 goals in a year), Mayne (39), Walters (46), Ballantyne (49), Fyfe (24) devoid of attacking options.

Ross Lyon teams in finals:

St Kilda
2009: 80, 60, 69
2010: 83, 88, 68, 52

Freo
2013: 87, 99, 62
2014: 69. 83
2015: 69, 67

What kind of flag contender doesn't crack 100 in 14 finals over 5 seasons? Not going to win too many games scoring under 70 points the majority of the time.

Hawthorn 2013-15 cracked 100 6 times in 10 finals. Collingwood 2010 3 times in 4 finals. Geelong 2007-11 7 times in 15 finals.

These sides were very good but not unbeatable. Hawthorn lost the 2012 GF and 2015 QF. Collingwood lost the 2011 GF and weren't really a factor outside 2010/11. Geelong lost the 2008 GF and two finals in 2010. The difference is that these sides took the game on and if they lost they lost. Ross Lyon sides had an MO of controlling the tempo of the game and not turning it into scoreboard pressure. A 10, 15, 20 point lead is nothing to those sides above if the dam wall breaks for 5-10 minutes.

 

[mcnulty]

Hawthorn lost the 2012 GF and 2015 PF.

 

[Scotland]

View attachment 1303957

It was QF the whole time.

Point being losing a GF meant nothing to winning the next 3. Losing a QF meant nothing to winning the GF 3 weeks later.

 

[Scotland]

No , a bit like real estate , it's not an exact science the draft. But for this thread, Hawthorn by strategy for many years avoided the top end of the draft . The results have been shown for the last few years , and IMO for the next few years. Richmond's strategy in a similar position has been different hasn't it??

2 years on from 3 flags in 4 years they had 5 picks inside 30 and recruited 5 teenagers. Compare that to Hawthorn 2-3 years on from a three -peat and giving away first round picks and their best young player for established talent. I do think Richmond will not win any more flags with this group. Suspect they may squeeze the 8, but may miss out. Their strategy with an eye for future years rather than the now though however, may allow them to bounce back quicker than either the Lions post 2005 or Hawks post 2015.

Hawthorn weren't anywhere near the pointy of the draft for a decade, give or take. 2009 they had pick 9 to play with which is pretty good but not coveted, every other year from 2010 to 2016 they were lucky to be starting in the teens, especially with two expansion drafts. When youv'e got Hodge, Mitchell, Franklin etc. why wouldn't you trade picks in the 20s for complimentary pieces like Gunston, Lake and Hale?

The astute footy judges among us said that trading away picks to top up from 2016 onward was a poor strategy. Mitchell at 23 years old was a no brainer, but giving up future assets for O'Meara and Wingard and spending money on guys like Vickery, Henderson, Scully, Patton was only going to raise the ceiling of that group to a middle 6 side. Much resistance was encountered from those who thought that using later picks and getting players from other teams was enough to bypass the traditional rebuild via the draft approach - used to great effect by Hawthorn - because Hawthorn. Curious logic.

10, 15, 11, 5/17, 7 wins over 5 seasons all but confirms the above. The fan base did go full North for a while expecting that a big or multiple big fish (Tom Lynch, Stephen Coniglio, Lachie Whitfield - whoever) would be landing imminently to turn the ship around. They did trade for Frosty I guess and everyone loves a Frosty run off half back. That they broke up a potential defensive pairing of Frosty and Tim O'Brien is a disappointment for footy fans everywhere.

Now that ladder position dictates their picks are better they have abandoned the 'Crazy Clarko' strategy and are back in the draft. Which is exactly what you would expect. Pick 6 last year and pick 7 this year (4th and 5th real picks respectively) and if they put those on the table for more 27/28 year olds they would have rocks in their heads. Nothing wrong with picking up another Tom Mitchell or an Adam Cerra that suit a future timeline if available. Reportedly they were keen for more draft assets in trade week but their good players 25+ aren't worth enough to attract top 10 picks in return and are worth too much to be giving away for speculative picks in the 20s so they are in an awkward position there. Values change quickly. I would've said my own team had a heap of players with trade currency 2-3 years ago, now no way.

Richmond have used a lot of picks in the 10-25 range for a side that has been in the top 4 for multiple years in a row. Having some players that look like future stars 23 and under while winning flags is a great position to be in.

 

[Freomaniac]

4th in points for, 16th by a mile in points against. Racking up scores while keeping bottom 8 sides to 40 or 50 points doesn't win you flags.

With Riewoldt, Koschitzke, Milne, Schneider and goalkicking mids Dal Santo and Goddard. I also wouldn't call a GF team with Pavlich (career best 72 goals in a year), Mayne (39), Walters (46), Ballantyne (49), Fyfe (24) devoid of attacking options.

Ross Lyon teams in finals:

St Kilda
2009: 80, 60, 69
2010: 83, 88, 68, 52

Freo
2013: 87, 99, 62
2014: 69. 83
2015: 69, 67

What kind of flag contender doesn't crack 100 in 14 finals over 5 seasons? Not going to win too many games scoring under 70 points the majority of the time.

Hawthorn 2013-15 cracked 100 6 times in 10 finals. Collingwood 2010 3 times in 4 finals. Geelong 2007-11 7 times in 15 finals.

These sides were very good but not unbeatable. Hawthorn lost the 2012 GF and 2015 QF. Collingwood lost the 2011 GF and weren't really a factor outside 2010/11. Geelong lost the 2008 GF and two finals in 2010. The difference is that these sides took the game on and if they lost they lost. Ross Lyon sides had an MO of controlling the tempo of the game and not turning it into scoreboard pressure. A 10, 15, 20 point lead is nothing to those sides above if the dam wall breaks for 5-10 minutes.

Did Your team score 100 points or more in the 2006 and 2018 grand finals? No they did not.



Actually lets talk about eagles 2018 season.

West coast averaged 93 points a game in attack, 75 points conceded in defence.

Collingwood, the other 2018 grand final side averaged 91 points in attack 73 points in defence.

West coast only scored over 100 points in that 2018 finals series and that was the preliminary final.

 

[Freomaniac]

No , a bit like real estate , it's not an exact science the draft. But for this thread, Hawthorn by strategy for many years avoided the top end of the draft . The results have been shown for the last few years , and IMO for the next few years. Richmond's strategy in a similar position has been different hasn't it??

2 years on from 3 flags in 4 years they had 5 picks inside 30 and recruited 5 teenagers. Compare that to Hawthorn 2-3 years on from a three -peat and giving away first round picks and their best young player for established talent. I do think Richmond will not win any more flags with this group. Suspect they may squeeze the 8, but may miss out. Their strategy with an eye for future years rather than the now though however, may allow them to bounce back quicker than either the Lions post 2005 or Hawks post 2015.

Don't get me wrong..... Having elite picks at the early part of the draft or top 5 picks can help but its not certain.

Go look at the 2009 draft.

Demons had pick 1 and 2. Demons used those picks on Scully and Trengeove. Richmond were lucky and had pick 3, used on Dustin Martin.

Freo had pick 4....... Used on a talented but injury riddled Anthony Morabito.

 

[Jack Green]

Don't get me wrong..... Having elite picks at the early part of the draft or top 5 picks can help but its not certain.

Go look at the 2009 draft.

Demons had pick 1 and 2. Demons used those picks on Scully and Trengeove. Richmond were lucky and had pick 3, used on Dustin Martin.

Freo had pick 4....... Used on a talented but injury riddled Anthony Morabito.

Agreed - not certain , but like tickets in lotto- the more you have the more chances you have to strike gold. Yeah - the Dees there and throw in Jack Watts from that era. Your always going to get some misses, but if you have more top picks the chances are far, far better.
The stats bear this out
Top 1-10 pick - 163 games
Top 11-20 pick - 118 games
Pick 31-50 - I/3 play 100 games
51-70 1/5.5 play 100 games

Really falls away - obviously can get gems late both picks and rookie - but if you want top end talent stats bear out - high picks are winners

 

[Jack Green]

Hawthorn weren't anywhere near the pointy of the draft for a decade, give or take. 2009 they had pick 9 to play with which is pretty good but not coveted, every other year from 2010 to 2016 they were lucky to be starting in the teens, especially with two expansion drafts. When youv'e got Hodge, Mitchell, Franklin etc. why wouldn't you trade picks in the 20s for complimentary pieces like Gunston, Lake and Hale?

The astute footy judges among us said that trading away picks to top up from 2016 onward was a poor strategy. Mitchell at 23 years old was a no brainer, but giving up future assets for O'Meara and Wingard and spending money on guys like Vickery, Henderson, Scully, Patton was only going to raise the ceiling of that group to a middle 6 side. Much resistance was encountered from those who thought that using later picks and getting players from other teams was enough to bypass the traditional rebuild via the draft approach - used to great effect by Hawthorn - because Hawthorn. Curious logic.

10, 15, 11, 5/17, 7 wins over 5 seasons all but confirms the above. The fan base did go full North for a while expecting that a big or multiple big fish (Tom Lynch, Stephen Coniglio, Lachie Whitfield - whoever) would be landing imminently to turn the ship around. They did trade for Frosty I guess and everyone loves a Frosty run off half back. That they broke up a potential defensive pairing of Frosty and Tim O'Brien is a disappointment for footy fans everywhere.

Now that ladder position dictates their picks are better they have abandoned the 'Crazy Clarko' strategy and are back in the draft. Which is exactly what you would expect. Pick 6 last year and pick 7 this year (4th and 5th real picks respectively) and if they put those on the table for more 27/28 year olds they would have rocks in their heads. Nothing wrong with picking up another Tom Mitchell or an Adam Cerra that suit a future timeline if available. Reportedly they were keen for more draft assets in trade week but their good players 25+ aren't worth enough to attract top 10 picks in return and are worth too much to be giving away for speculative picks in the 20s so they are in an awkward position there. Values change quickly. I would've said my own team had a heap of players with trade currency 2-3 years ago, now no way.

Richmond have used a lot of picks in the 10-25 range for a side that has been in the top 4 for multiple years in a row. Having some players that look like future stars 23 and under while winning flags is a great position to be in.

My friend you know your stuff.
It was the Hawks post 2016 strategy that has led to where they are now. Yep, the bulk of their fan base did not question Clarko [ and why would you]
And yes the bulk of their supporters [ there were certainly some dissenting Hawks on this strategy] thought they could avoid rebuilding because of the genius of Clarko, their winning culture and their development of players at Box Hill/ Hawthorn. That has been proven to be false.

They were always a cautionary tale for Richmond 5 years on, who have done things very differently. It will be interesting how the next few years go for the Tigers .

 

[Scotland]

Did Your team score 100 points or more in the 2006 and 2018 grand finals? No they did not.



Actually lets talk about eagles 2018 season.

West coast averaged 93 points a game in attack, 75 points conceded in defence.

Collingwood, the other 2018 grand final side averaged 91 points in attack 73 points in defence.

West coast only scored over 100 points in that 2018 finals series and that was the preliminary final.

That's great and all, but the average score per team per game across the league in 2018 was 83 compared to 92 in 2013, 91 in 2009, 90 in 2010. I'm not holding anything against Richmond for being low scoring in 2020, it was a historically low scoring year. Our 2005/6 scores in finals vs Sydney were generally lower, want to hazard a guess who was a senior assistant there at that time?

In any event, we averaged 93 points per game for the season then scored 86, 121 and 79. I'd say that's preferable to averaging 100 in the H&A season then not even making it to 70 in 4 GFs. Most neutrals enjoyed the 2018 GF and it finished 79-74. It wasn't a boring negative game. If we kicked better in the second half we probably would've won b 3-4 goals. Does anyone that doesn't support Hawthorn want to sit through 2013 again?

 

[Scotland]

My friend you know your stuff.
It was the Hawks post 2016 strategy that has led to where they are now. Yep, the bulk of their fan base did not question Clarko [ and why would you]
And yes the bulk of their supporters [ there were certainly some dissenting Hawks on this strategy] thought they could avoid rebuilding because of the genius of Clarko, their winning culture and their development of players at Box Hill/ Hawthorn. That has been proven to be false.

They were always a cautionary tale for Richmond 5 years on, who have done things very differently. It will be interesting how the next few years go for the Tigers .

'Where they are now' isn't that bad. A few of their players get their tyres overinflated ITT but Worpel, Jiath, DGB, Day, Koschitzke, Reeves etc. are all 23 and under. They aren't #1 but overall they would have a better crop of 23 and under players at this point in time than my own team for example. You wouldn't be nervous as Mitchell coming as coach even though he already knows the place inside out. Footy changes quickly, it's only Gold Coast that you'd be wary of walking into because they can't build foundation to build from so are constantly starting again.

Their issue is that the list is unbalanced. O'Meara, Mitchell, Wingard, Frost, Sicily, Impey, Shiels, Gunston, Breust, McEvoy are all in their prime or late prime and they are a couple of years off getting the best out of the group of players that are (depressingly) born this century. I assume they will run it back to some degree with a mix of experience/youth in 2022 but that's an assumption. They might go full yoof, but it's a poor use of salary cap and negatively impacts trade value to play your better experienced players in the magoos. If they are fielding half the side or more as 100+ game players then they really shouldn't be bad enough to be getting another top 5 pick, but if they are trying to blood youngsters (none of their young talls have played more than about 30 games which is training wheels for key position players) they probably won't be that good either. Merit in hitting the draft hard, merit in trying to build a competitive team and if you get pick 8 or 10 or 12 or whatever so be it. I guess we'll wait and see what the plan for 2022 is.

 

[Jack Green]

'Where they are now' isn't that bad. A few of their players get their tyres overinflated ITT but Worpel, Jiath, DGB, Day, Koschitzke, Reeves etc. are all 23 and under. They aren't #1 but overall they would have a better crop of 23 and under players at this point in time than my own team for example. You wouldn't be nervous as Mitchell coming as coach even though he already knows the place inside out. Footy changes quickly, it's only Gold Coast that you'd be wary of walking into because they can't build foundation to build from so are constantly starting again.

Their issue is that the list is unbalanced. O'Meara, Mitchell, Wingard, Frost, Sicily, Impey, Shiels, Gunston, Breust, McEvoy are all in their prime or late prime and they are a couple of years off getting the best out of the group of players that are (depressingly) born this century. I assume they will run it back to some degree with a mix of experience/youth in 2022 but that's an assumption. They might go full yoof, but it's a poor use of salary cap and negatively impacts trade value to play your better experienced players in the magoos. If they are fielding half the side or more as 100+ game players then they really shouldn't be bad enough to be getting another top 5 pick, but if they are trying to blood youngsters (none of their young talls have played more than about 30 games which is training wheels for key position players) they probably won't be that good either. Merit in hitting the draft hard, merit in trying to build a competitive team and if you get pick 8 or 10 or 12 or whatever so be it. I guess we'll wait and see what the plan for 2022 is.

Your read is similar to mine. I would count 9 of their best 22 28+ come Round 1. So unbalanced, but not Geelong unbalanced- but Geelong probably still hold hopes of perhaps holding on for a flag chance the next season or two , where the Hawks are fully aware they can't contend.
Interesting how Mitchell tackles it- I suspect he'll kick off with their best side with senior players, but if it comes to a stage in the year where finals aren't possible, some of the older crew may start to get phased out and more kids played.
Their inexperienced tall's who need games are the key for me. They need to be played and persevered with like Franklin and Roughead 2005/6 irrespective of wins/losses.

 

[The hands of stone]

This thread is still going , incredible !

 

[mcnulty]

…and it’s almost entirely based on list. Which really isn’t what it used to be. Look at the Richmond “list” of 2016 versus 2017, and perception thereof. Teams have come from outside the eight to play in GFs in recent years.

I’m realistic about the Hawks chances next year but they’re list neither as good nor as bad as some here think it is. Because with injuries, draws, game plans, luck it can all change. At the end of next year there might be some significant revisions. Either way.

Personally I’m not really confident with prognostications these days.

 

[hawkman]

Does anyone that doesn't support Hawthorn want to sit through 2013 again?

Since the demolition of Sydney in 2014, I can't remember watching it more than once. 2014 and 2015 have been watched a few times

 

[Jack Green]

This thread is still going , incredible !

It is incredible. And I'm as guilty as anyone for it doing so. Could we all make a New Years resolution not to post anything on this forum ever again

 

[Freomaniac]

This thread is still going , incredible !

Just like the bloke on your avatar. This thread still keeps fighting on past its prime...

And yes i know its the legendary Robert Duran on your avatar.

 

[matey]

'Where they are now' isn't that bad. A few of their players get their tyres overinflated ITT but Worpel, Jiath, DGB, Day, Koschitzke, Reeves etc. are all 23 and under. They aren't #1 but overall they would have a better crop of 23 and under players at this point in time than my own team for example ………. Their issue is that the list is unbalanced. O'Meara, Mitchell, Wingard, Frost, Sicily, Impey, Shiels, Gunston, Breust, McEvoy are all in their prime or late prime

So Hawks have a pretty good group in that experienced category, a good promising young group in the < 23 category with improvement left ……. what would really enhance the list is becoming a destination club again! This plays a big part in recent premiership teams ……. to fill the missing pieces.

 

[Scotland]

Since the demolition of Sydney in 2014, I can't remember watching it more than once. 2014 and 2015 have been watched a few times

2014 will probably never get the appreciation it deserves. Was a complete dismantling of a team that didn't miss the top 4 for 5 years in a row and made 3 GFs in that time. It wasn't like 2007 where everyone was playing for second. I'm not a neutral but I don't think 2015 offered much. Hawks got out to an early lead against a team not expected to make finals and the game just meandered a bit after that. 2013 was a snoozefest, 2012 and 2014 you could easily watch as a neutral but most wouldn't pick the latter because of the margin.

 

[Scotland]

So Hawks have a pretty good group in that experienced category, a good promising young group in the < 23 category with improvement left ……. what would really enhance the list is becoming a destination club again! This plays a big part in recent premiership teams ……. to fill the missing pieces.

Mixture of win now and win later players. But not winning now.