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

[Scotland]

I reckon Geelong have copped plenty of criticism since Chris Scott took over, both for performance and recruiting. Every team would take a 25 year old Dangerfield. Questionable whether Scott Selwood, Smith, Tuohy, Rivers, Rohan, Dahlhaus, Henderson etc. were the right moves post 2011. They've been consistently in the finals but have never made it past the prelim. Is that personnel, coaching or both?

The biggest distinction between Geelong and Hawthorn is that Geelong never had a bunch of early draft picks. They did benefit from father-son selections (Hawkins being the highest rated at the time IIRC), but their earliest draft pick was Selwood at 7. Chapman, Ling, Enright, Kelly, Johnson, Taylor, Duncan etc. were all players anyone could have picked up. Unless Geelong have a pick inside the top 10, they have tended to burn first round picks and pick good players in the 20s to 40s. Hawthorn had Hodge (1), Roughead (2), Franklin (5) and Lewis (7) - arguably the 4 of the 5 most important players over a long period. People do find it a bit rich whenever anyone says 'pfft, don't need early picks' when a whole era of success wouldn't have happened without them. We managed to win a flag with Shuey (18), Yeo (30) and Sheed (11) in the middle but I tell you it would've made life a lot easier to just Chris Judd to throw in there again.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Let's be honest Gav, up until the last 2 years or so, Geelong under Scott and Wells have also had this philosophy. And at this point in time, it's hard to gauge honestly whether the Cats youth is any better than The Hawks on exposed form, Miers is a tidy player, but he is no Worpel.

Agreed and while being around in finals Cats haven’t delivered

 

[Pessimistic]

Ironic that geelong and hawthorn two of the few clubs to actually build wildly successful teams through repeated drafting, yet now are being triggered in this thread for not repeating that.

Geelong and Hawthorns brains trusts are not numpties.

do you think for a minute theyd be following that path if they thought it was relavant to today? Things changed around 2010

 

[Pessimistic]

Four years since a flag and counting. Fourth shortest premiership drought. Pitchforks safely in the barn gathering dust.

Personally I wont be agitated till 2022

 

[schmuttt]

Yes they are experienced travellers for such young men. No denying that. But nice attempt with the old "Ur TeAm Is RuBbIsH tOo". There are a million threads on carltons extended mediocrity. Just because I support carlton doesn't mean I cannot critique another club. I don't literally represent carlton and all the decisions they have made. I'm just a regular footy pundit.

Yeah but you see hawks fans think they were a key part of the triple premiership side.

 

[Sixpence]

Agreed and while being around in finals Cats haven’t delivered

That's not to say Geelong and Hawthorn can't have success with this approach, just that it hasn't happened yet. Both may fail, but you could find another team like West Coast or Richmond win a flag with the same tactic in the future.

Also, the goal isn't to build a dominating, three-peat winning team, it's to simply win another flag. Comparing this tactic to what was used to build up the three-peat team is a little strange.

 

[Easy Slips Catch]

Yeah but you see hawks fans think they were a key part of the triple premiership side.

That must be a chilling concept for Demon fans.

 

[schmuttt]

That must be a chilling concept for Demon fans.

Following a s**t team teaches emotional maturity.

 

[TheFourPillars]

Following a s**t team teaches emotional maturity.

emotional maturity * that

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

I reckon Geelong have copped plenty of criticism since Chris Scott took over, both for performance and recruiting. Every team would take a 25 year old Dangerfield. Questionable whether Scott Selwood, Smith, Tuohy, Rivers, Rohan, Dahlhaus, Henderson etc. were the right moves post 2011. They've been consistently in the finals but have never made it past the prelim. Is that personnel, coaching or both?

The biggest distinction between Geelong and Hawthorn is that Geelong never had a bunch of early draft picks. They did benefit from father-son selections (Hawkins being the highest rated at the time IIRC), but their earliest draft pick was Selwood at 7. Chapman, Ling, Enright, Kelly, Johnson, Taylor, Duncan etc. were all players anyone could have picked up. Unless Geelong have a pick inside the top 10, they have tended to burn first round picks and pick good players in the 20s to 40s. Hawthorn had Hodge (1), Roughead (2), Franklin (5) and Lewis (7) - arguably the 4 of the 5 most important players over a long period. People do find it a bit rich whenever anyone says 'pfft, don't need early picks' when a whole era of success wouldn't have happened without them. We managed to win a flag with Shuey (18), Yeo (30) and Sheed (11) in the middle but I tell you it would've made life a lot easier to just Chris Judd to throw in there again.

You are looking at the wrong period there. Both Geelong (1999/2001) and Hawthorn (2001/2004) had big hauls prior to moving up the ladder.

Geelong: Mackie, Tenace, Selwood, Corey, Bartel = 5 x Top 10 picks from 99-2006 (plus Ablett, Hawkins, Scarlett as Father Son). Nakia the only one drafted since 2006, but added Caddy, McIntosh, Clark, Dangerfield, Henderson, Rohan (6) former top-10 picks via trade.

Hawthorn: McPharlin, Hodge (Traded), Brennan, Roughead, Franklin, Lewis, Ellis, Dowler, Thorp = 8 x Top 10 picks from 99-2006. None since 2006, but added Burgoyne, Hale, McEvoy, O'Meara, O'Rouke, Wingard, Scully, Patton (8) former top-10 picks via Trade.

They are actually a lot closer to each other than I had imagined.

 

[TylerDurden]

You are looking at the wrong period there. Both Geelong (1999/2001) and Hawthorn (2001/2004) had big hauls prior to moving up the ladder.

Geelong: Mackie, Tenace, Selwood, Corey, Bartel = 5 x Top 10 picks from 99-2006 (plus Ablett, Hawkins, Scarlett as Father Son). Nakia the only one drafted since 2006, but added Caddy, McIntosh, Clark, Dangerfield, Henderson, Rohan (6) former top-10 picks via trade.

Hawthorn: McPharlin, Hodge (Traded), Brennan, Roughead, Franklin, Lewis, Ellis, Dowler, Thorp = 8 x Top 10 picks from 99-2006. None since 2006, but added Burgoyne, Hale, McEvoy, O'Meara, O'Rouke, Wingard, Scully, Patton (8) former top-10 picks via Trade.

They are actually a lot closer to each other than I had imagined.

Plus Mitchell FS.

 

[Tig017]

do you think for a minute theyd be following that path if they thought it was relavant to today? Things changed around 2010

You say that, yet I don't see results. All recent flag winners have been build on strong drafting. Hawthorn finished 9th and still have the oldest list in the AFL.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

You say that, yet I don't see results. All recent flag winners have been build on strong drafting. Hawthorn finished 9th and still have the oldest list in the AFL.

Another myth perpetuated by the media. They love to use simple stats - so use all 38-40 players. Really should be focused on those actually playing (I did the 2019 stats somewhere earlier in the thread). Even with simple stats though it's still wrong.

Currently 3rd, will drop to 4th, maybe 5th when they finalise their 2020 list. Remove Burgoyne (who lets face it is basically Benjamin Button) and they would be about 9th in 2020.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Another myth perpetuated by the media. They love to use simple stats - so use all 38-40 players. Really should be focused on those actually playing (I did the 2019 stats somewhere earlier in the thread). Even with simple stats though it's still wrong.

Currently 3rd, will drop to 4th, maybe 5th when they finalise their 2020 list. Remove Burgoyne (who lets face it is basically Benjamin Button) and they would be about 9th in 2020.

So in other words if you move it around and change this and that, hawthorn dont have the oldest list

Right

 

[TallyHawk]

So in other words if you move it around and change this and that, hawthorn dont have the oldest list

Right

Currently 3rd oldest with a decision to be made on Minchington or Cassar.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Pessimistic]

Another myth perpetuated by the media. They love to use simple stats - so use all 38-40 players. Really should be focused on those actually playing (I did the 2019 stats somewhere earlier in the thread). Even with simple stats though it's still wrong.

Currently 3rd, will drop to 4th, maybe 5th when they finalise their 2020 list. Remove Burgoyne (who lets face it is basically Benjamin Button) and they would be about 9th in 2020.

ist not the oldest list by any criteria whatsoever

 

[Tig017]

Another myth perpetuated by the media.

What are you talking about? You objectively have the oldest list in the competition.

They love to use simple stats - so use all 38-40 players. Really should be focused on those actually playing (I did the 2019 stats somewhere earlier in the thread). Even with simple stats though it's still wrong.

Sure, when you cherry pick all the bits of information that don't fit your narrative, you can come to any conclusion.

All of Burgoyne, Frawley, Henderson, Smith, McEvoy, Puopolo and Stratton are over 30 and still in your best 22. Some of them are still extremely important pivots too, like McEvoy and Frawley. Then you have Gunston, Ceglar, Shiels, Breust and Scully turning 29/30 this year.

Your list is old, and the youth you have coming in isn't as good as other teams.

 

[Tedeski]

I think Hawks will finish top 4 this year & continue with another successful era.
Too well run as a club to stay out of the finals.

 

[matey]

What are you talking about? You objectively have the oldest list in the competition.

Sure, when you cherry pick all the bits of information that don't fit your narrative, you can come to any conclusion.

All of Burgoyne, Frawley, Henderson, Smith, McEvoy, Puopolo and Stratton are over 30 and still in your best 22. Some of them are still extremely important pivots too, like McEvoy and Frawley. Then you have Gunston, Ceglar, Shiels, Breust and Scully turning 29/30 this year.

Your list is old, and the youth you have coming in isn't as good as other teams.

Out of all of those names you mention only one landed in the top 6 of last years B&F. 5 of the top 6 were 24 yo and under. The eventual winner a 20 yo.

Today Hawks best players are none of the ones you mentioned above ....the baton has been passed onto a new core group taking the club forward. Future is looking bright.

 

[Tig017]

Out of all of those names you mention only one landed in the top 6 of last years B&F. 5 of the top 6 were 24 yo and under. The eventual winner a 20 yo.

Who cares about B&F placements? Completely irrelevant because they're club-voted awards.

Today Hawks best players are none of the ones you mentioned above ....the baton has been passed onto a new core group taking the club forward. Future is looking bright.

Maybe not their best players, but still some of them are still important cogs for team structure, and on-field leaders who understand what it takes to win a flag.

Also, your lineup of players aged 23 or under is clearly inferior to about 6-7 teams.

 

[cryptor]

Who cares about B&F placements? Completely irrelevant because they're club-voted awards.

Why would the fact they're "club-voted" make it irrelevant?

 

[RUNVS]

Four years since a flag and counting. Fourth shortest premiership drought. Pitchforks safely in the barn gathering dust.

Personally I wont be agitated till 2022

There are Hawthron fans out there that were conceived and are now running around in the playground who have never experienced a Hawthron flag.

 

[matey]

Who cares about B&F placements? Completely irrelevant because they're club-voted awards.


Maybe not their best players, but still some of them are still important cogs for team structure, and on-field leaders who understand what it takes to win a flag.

Also, your lineup of players aged 23 or under is clearly inferior to about 6-7 teams.

Tigers best players are old! They have more to worry about in the next couple years in falling off the cliff.

Much easier to build/maintain a quality side around a quality core group of younger players. Some of the oldies will depart soon and some new ones will come in that will play a role but the Hawks current best players will be around for the next 5-7 years minimum. To turn around a list so quickly since a three peat, that will hopefully challenge again in the near future, without access to high end draft picks is simply amazing.

We are witnessing something special and Clarko’s innovation will alter the AFL landscape once again.

 

[Roddy]

I think Hawks will finish top 4 this year & continue with another successful era.
Too well run as a club to stay out of the finals.

This.
No matter how desperately Hawk-enviers want this not to be the case, no matter how badly they want us to have the 'oldest list', no matter how much they bleat on about our list being, on average, 4 weeks older than the next oldest list, this will always be the case.

 

[hk89]

What are you talking about? You objectively have the oldest list in the competition.

Based on what metric? According to this article which was published last month, we have the third oldest list

Oldest, youngest, most experienced: Where does your club rank?

How does your club compare in age and experience

www.afl.com.au

And according to that list's age ranking , we are only 0.02 years away from being the 5th oldest, given we are equal with 4th listed North, and 0.01 years older than Geelong.

Do you have a more up to date figure than that from another source?

Sure, when you cherry pick all the bits of information that don't fit your narrative, you can come to any conclusion.

Or you can just make s**t up, and come to any conclusion. You seem to be the making s**t up type.