Can Hawthorn succeed while ignoring the elite end of the draft?

[sr36]

How is it arrogance? Hawthorn aren't signing up every injured star and laughing about how they'll fix'em up good as new. The players are carefully selected and assessed on a variety of factors that determine the likliehood of playing good footy again. The prices we pay in trade and in contracts are reflective of those assessments. Sometimes they'll work out (eg. Burgoyne) and other times they won't (eg. O'Rourke).

If we were paying huge prices like we did with O'Meara and Burgoyne every time then I would completely agree that it's an unsustainable model. But those cases aren't at all representative of the majority of these kind of deals for players under bad injury clouds who we end up paying very little for.

If you think these kinds of calculated risks that involve a professional level of skill and knowledge being put into action is akin to gambling on something that you have next to no control over then I can see how you might consider it arrogance and "dumb". But the fact is that Hawthorn do have a very good record in that space and I think it's pretty foolish to put it down to luck. But then I do hope every other club thinks like you.

My view is that injuries and drafting are a combination of skill and luck, if you have some wins and assume it is all to do with skill and that you're way ahead of other clubs in these areas, you are becoming over-confident in your skill, which is how I view Hawthorn's recent decisions. Because I don't like Hawthorn, I'm using the word arrogant rather than over-confident.

 

[TallyHawk]

My view is that injuries and drafting are a combination of skill and luck, if you have some wins and assume it is all to do with skill and that you're way ahead of other clubs in these areas, you are becoming over-confident in your skill, which is how I view Hawthorn's recent decisions. Because I don't like Hawthorn, I'm using the word arrogant rather than over-confident.

What we are attempting is to win premierships, isn't that the objective of all Clubs? Focusing on proven talent in the 21-26yo bracket shouldn't be viewed as ignoring the elite end of the draft, scratch the surface and see where these guys were originally drafted. That's right they were drafted at the pointy end of the draft when we were 3peating.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[sr36]

What we are attempting is to win premierships, isn't that the objective of all Clubs? Focusing on proven talent in the 21-26yo bracket shouldn't be viewed as ignoring the elite end of the draft, scratch the surface and see where these guys were originally drafted. That's right they were drafted at the pointy end of the draft when we were 3peating.

On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

I get it. You've gone through hard rubbish and found some old damaged things that were once really valuable. You're confident that your medical craftsmen can repair them and get them back to mint condition. It's a great idea for one or two pieces in the house, but my view is that you're trying to build a whole house from hard rubbish finds - I don't like your chances and think it will set you way back.

 

[Maxabillions]

Wouldn’t be surprised to see an injury crisis hit hawthorn next year with the amount players on the list now who have had serious injuries in the past, and a lot of older players.

They’ve also lost a couple of key fitness staff in the last two years.

Definitely in a risky position.

 

[Pessimistic]

Yes but Dowler, Thorp and Ellis show you can build a dynasty even with a fair few things going wrong. Even if everything goes rivht with the current course, i don't think you'll even be genuine challengers and itll be a tiny window. For the first time in 40years I'm confident that Hawthorn are doing something in a half arsed way - this rebuild is like a DIY Greek extension from the 70s.

Id bet every other team bar a couple have had more access to early picks since 05-06, surely one of them would have the 4 flags by now, going on that logic

 

[Pessimistic]

I get it. You've gone through hard rubbish and found some old damaged things that were once really valuable. You're confident that your medical craftsmen can repair them and get them back to mint condition. It's a great idea for one or two pieces in the house, but my view is that you're trying to build a whole house from hard rubbish finds - I don't like your chances and think it will set you way back.

As is repeatedly repeated, half the current 22 came via trades, half came via draft. Hawks put more emphasis on trade ins than most other teams, but its still not what you are saying ‘try to build the whole house from hard rubbish’

 

[cryptor]

My view is that injuries and drafting are a combination of skill and luck, if you have some wins and assume it is all to do with skill and that you're way ahead of other clubs in these areas, you are becoming over-confident in your skill, which is how I view Hawthorn's recent decisions.

What is your basis for saying Hawthorn have become over-confident in this skill? They don't exclusively trade for injured stars. It doesn't even make up that big a percentage of their total player acquisition types. In total or even just by trades. Hawthorn are still taking an even handed approach by trading for fit role players, and hitting the draft and managing to find some really good players with later picks. Maybe we're just really lucky at unearthing late draft gems too?

Because I don't like Hawthorn, I'm using the word arrogant rather than over-confident.

This much was evident.

 

[TylerDurden]

Wouldn’t be surprised to see an injury crisis hit hawthorn next year with the amount players on the list now who have had serious injuries in the past, and a lot of older players.

They’ve also lost a couple of key fitness staff in the last two years.

Definitely in a risky position.

Plus we'll take Kemp if he falls to 11

 

[Maxabillions]

Plus we'll take Kemp if he falls to 11

Uh oh

 

[btdg]

Next year is the really interesting test case for Hawthorn's 'rebuild' imo.

They'll have on their list the following players in their primes (age 24-28). Players with an *** were traded for:


Age 28: Gunston,
Age 27: Mitchell***, Wingard***, Patton***, Frost***
Age 26: O'Meara***, O'Brien,
Age 25: Impey***, Sicily, Howe,

Bookending that core group, they have the following:
Age 29-30: Ceglar, Scully***, Breust, Shiels,
Age 22-23: Glass, Hardwick,

That's a core of 16 players who are pretty close to their peak; supported by some veterans in McEvoy, Burgoyne, Smith, Henderson, Frawley, Stratton and with promising youngsters Worpel, Lewis, Cousins, Morrison and Scrimshaw.

Basically, 2020 is the team they were building with this strategy. The veterans probably don't have much left in the tank, and there's more in the 29-30 group than the 22-23 group. With some younger players also contributing, this is the rebuild coming to fruition and being arguably as successful as could be hoped (with the only real miss being the 'last' midfielder to round things out - either Shiel or Coniglio). This rebuilding strategy has 100% worked though - what Hawthorn have is the same thing all teams aim for - 15-16 decent players in their peak years, with some vets and good youngsters to supply experience and depth, and the chance to have a crack at a premiership if all goes right.

Here's the risk, though: I think this group has a 2 year prime, then they're back in basically the same place they were in 2015/16 - a heap of veterans turning over, and a bunch of players who will be 28-30 coming to the end of their primes, with a bit of a gap to the good youngsters.

The flipside alternative, rebuilding through the draft, gives a LONGER peak, if not necessarily a HIGHER peak. Carlton, for example, who began 'rebuilding' at roughly the same time, won't get to the start of the window for another 2 years, but at that point will likely have roughly the same 15-16 players, except they'll be clustered aged 23-26, plus a 'senior' core aged 26-28 and another 5-6 in the 21-23 bracket. That's a slightly deeper core, with a slightly longer 'peak', and another couple of years to top-up (less pressure to continually 'hit' along the way). The gamble is a) keeping the players that long, and b) whether the peak is as high, and the cost has been 4-5 pretty miserable years. I'm not sure one way or the other is better (Hawthorn had played their hand extremely well IMO; they probably would have done better than Carlton with the same draft approach too - its more a comparison of style and endpoint that matters)

So I dunno, I feel like Hawthorn will be vindicated if they finish top 4 in 2020 (which is definitely on the table IMO), and then have a legit crack at a preimership in 2021 (also definitely on the table, particularly if they have a good 2020 and can attract that last big fish free agent). If not, they're kind of starting again, and their doubters probably win the argument (particularly if Clarko leaves and they are genuinely starting from scratch).

 

[WWSD]

Who gets the number one key defender now Patton or Lewis? Gunston to freewheel.

Frawley and Frost take the number one and two best key forwards respectively.

Thereby Sicily now plays the Gibson role and no longer has to worry about playing on the opposition key forwards anymore.

Mitchell makes those around him better like Worpel, O’Meara and Shiels.

The elite outside run coming from Smith, Henderson and Scully.

McEvoy and Ceglar are just about the best ruck duo going around.

Burgoyne and Wingard add the finishing touches.

#hawthornproblems

 

[Gavin Excell]

Who gets the number one key defender now Patton or Lewis? Gunston to freewheel.

Frawley and Frost take the number one and two best key forwards respectively.

Thereby Sicily now plays the Gibson role and no longer has to worry about playing on the opposition key forwards anymore.

Mitchell makes those around him better like Worpel, O’Meara and Shiels.

The elite outside run coming from Smith, Henderson and Scully.

McEvoy and Ceglar are just about the best ruck duo going around.

Burgoyne and Wingard add the finishing touches.

#hawthornproblems

So with all this self congratulating why are Hawthorn supporters reluctant to come out and say top4 is on the cards?

 

[cryptor]

So with all this self congratulating why are Hawthorn supporters reluctant to come out and say top4 is on the cards?

Top 4 is on the cards.

 

[Pessimistic]

Of course the strategy depends on other clubs continually hard rebuilding and jettisonning stars (donating) every five years.

Not unhappy at all this is still popular out there. But I do believe support for this orthodoxy is waning. Be OK for While

And btw hawks seem to peak every 7 years. 2001. 2008 2015. So the next high point will be around 2022

 

[Pessimistic]

So with all this self congratulating why are Hawthorn supporters reluctant to come out and say top4 is on the cards?

Top 4 is the aim every year

 

[Gavin Excell]

Top 4 is on the cards.

Noted

 

[sr36]

As is repeatedly repeated, half the current 22 came via trades, half came via draft. Hawks put more emphasis on trade ins than most other teams, but its still not what you are saying ‘try to build the whole house from hard rubbish’

I dont agree with the op in terms of the draft and i think Mitchell and JOM were good moves, because they are young enough to be long term. I think the Hawks have also been smart to realise that those late first or second round picks are overrated and you get more in trade than at the draft table. Where i think they've stuffed up is that they've then gone on to add a lot of over 25 players - short termers. Good teams are built around a core of long termers amd the Hawks are minimising their chances of building this core. Good on them for trying to break the mold, but the mold they're going with has been tried and failed over and over again and has usually sent the club to the bottom.

 

[Pessimistic]

The average age of all AFL lists seems to have added ~5 years over since the expansion drafts anyway

 

[Pessimistic]

I dont agree with the op in terms of the draft and i think Mitchell and JOM were good moves, because they are young enough to be long term. I think the Hawks have also been smart to realise that those late first or second round picks are overrated and you get more in trade than at the draft table. Where i think they've stuffed up is that they've then gone on to add a lot of over 25 players - short termers. Good teams are built around a core of long termers amd the Hawks are minimising their chances of building this core. Good on them for trying to break the mold, but the mold they're going with has been tried and failed over and over again and has usually sent the club to the bottom.

Patton and frost drafter in the same draft as mitchell jom and wingard. Granted its three trades later they came to hawthorn

Patton. Frost, scully. What opportunity in the draft did they cost? The worst you could say they may be preventing accellerated development for youngsters

 

[sr36]

What is your basis for saying Hawthorn have become over-confident in this skill? They don't exclusively trade for injured stars. It doesn't even make up that big a percentage of their total player acquisition types. In total or even just by trades. Hawthorn are still taking an even handed approach by trading for fit role players, and hitting the draft and managing to find some really good players with later picks. Maybe we're just really lucky at unearthing late draft gems too?

Worpel looks an absolute ripper and Bruest has been pure gold, but most teams can boast a couple. Have the Hawks actually been significantly more successful with late picks than other clubs?

 

[Pessimistic]

Worpel looks an absolute ripper and Bruest has been pure gold, but most teams can boast a couple. Have the Hawks actually been significantly more successful with late picks than other clubs?

By my reckoning 40% since 2010 from drafting, about 85% from trades (vickery, orourke etc)

 

[sr36]

Patton and frost drafter in the same draft as mitchell jom and wingard. Granted its three trades later they came to hawthorn

Patton. Frost, scully. What opportunity in the draft did they cost? The worst you could say they may be preventing accellerated development for youngsters

Plus Wingard plus Henderson. Your loading up with a core of blokes in that age bracket. If all goes fantastically, they may gel in a couple of years time and open up a really short window. But i think its much more likely that they'll keep you in the middle of the ladder for the next four years before its time to start again at which point the trajectory will be downwards.

 

[Pessimistic]

Theres no start again its a continual process.

Your advocacy seems to be to avoid gradual decline. Force decline and load up with kids in the same age bracket then hope someone else hasnt done it better than you.

I believe the club carefully considered that to be more risky, only to be entertained if you have a list crash


I also believe therell be a core of youngsters from the 18-19-20 drafts too

Still a bit light on from the 12-13-14 drafts but that will be addressed by mature recruits from that era. Impey and scrimshaw already.

 

[Spook]

Pies rebuilt from 2013-2018 by trading in young guys and hitting the draft. The Hawks looked like they were going a similar way - which is how I think you should do it - by trading in young guys with a lot of footy left in front of them - Mitchell and JOM. I think it was a really good move. It's what they've done since that I can't understand. I think they've lost the plot and are setting themsleves up to remain an aging middle of the road list that falls further once the old guys decline.

And where did you finish in 2013-2107? About 12th each year so you got good draft picks. Meanwhile hawthorn finished 12th 1 year in 2017, otherwise top 4 from even before and after that period. So that’s maybe why a different philosophy was used hey!

In 2014 You got de Goey and Moore at picks 9 and 5.... you got 5 from Brisbane for Beams while we got 19 for Franklin.

You gave up 2x pick 7 in 15&16 for Treloar..... worth it but I’m sure Hawthorn would have done the same IF THEY had finished as low as 12th for 4 years and had 2 pick 7s in a row. GWS turned 7 into Taranto...... if only we had those early picks.
In 2017 you had PICK 6 for finishing in bottom 6 and gave up about pick 27 for Hoskin-Elliot. Oh, if only Hawthorn had finished so low for so many years to have such a low 2nd round pick.......

If Hawthorn had finished as low as Collingwood did for 4 years in a a row we would have had picks like that. But alas we didn’t so we had to work other ways to get the players of that quality. And yes we may have had to get 2 key position players at 25 rather than 19 but hey. For KPP we all know they take a while to develop so we haven’t lost as much as with most players.

Also if you had done such a wonderful job with your trading then let’s look at what GWS let go and what yhey got and how that played out in your last game. Taranto and Hooper were pretty bloody good weren’t they.

 

[Spook]

Plus Wingard plus Henderson. Your loading up with a core of blokes in that age bracket. If all goes fantastically, they may gel in a couple of years time and open up a really short window. But i think its much more likely that they'll keep you in the middle of the ladder for the next four years before its time to start again at which point the trajectory will be downwards.

Sounds very familiar when we traded/drafted/loaded up in a similar age bracket, Gibson, McAvoy, Burgoyne, Hale, Lake,

Hawthorn have a tried and tested omethod with ensuring players have had time before debuting. Classic legend examples are Tuck and Dipper. Puopolo was turning 24 in his debut year, Smith 23 in his and even Stratton was older than the norm at 21 ish.

We have had more success than average doing it our way rather than the average way so I don’t see why we would change.

Except for the top end of about 5 a year, I’m sure we all agree that most players take time to develop. If these players can do their development at other clubs years earlier while we are wining flagsor trying others then that’s a good thing isn’t it?