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

[Pessimistic]

I hear richmond had 18 players in both premierships
If they get another in the next 2 years they might have more than 12 that geelong had across their three premierships.
Hawks and lions had three successiv years (with a fourth runner up) and had about 16 players play in all three

 

[Pessimistic]

No, but he's one out of the box. A freak event.

Nor lynch. Replace hawthorn in th thread title with * and the myth is busted

 

[Ron The Bear]

I hear richmond had 18 players in both premierships
If they get another in the next 2 years they might have more than 12 that geelong had across their three premierships.
Hawks and lions had three successiv years (with a fourth runner up) and had about 16 players play in all three

16. Grigg & Ellis, and probably Townsend/Butler/McIntosh won't play in another flag.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Nor lynch. Replace hawthorn in th thread title with * and the myth is busted

Except for 2016 (Prestia trade), Richmond has used its first-rounder at every draft since 2004. Not comparable situations... yet.

 

[AeneasX]

B&F's aren't done yet, so I just used the Player Ratings.

It's not perfect by any means, and underrates defenders/stoppers, but it's handy as a ready reckoner between clubs.

Ron The Bear, using the raw average doesn't factor in the effectiveness of the contributions - not every player add the same value. Using a ranking system (with all it's faults) provides a better indication. If we could find a way to integrate VORP into rating scale it would be very enlightening.

This is always the challenge for "era" sides - Hawks had a 'missing generation' of talented youth during 12-16 hence the trading out of picks to bring talented players and leaders into the 23-25 grouping (Mitchell, O'Meara, Wingard, Scully). This has reduced the expected drop as they replaced their legends (Hodge, Mitchell, Burgoyne*, Lewis, Rioli, Roughead) over the last three seasons (and transitioned the rest to periphery roles). Geelong went the other way - targeted players to round out their support roles for success now with their current group of veterans, but they didn't have the gap behind their best 22 that Hawthorn did. Hawthorn were probably 3rd or 4th best performed side at the end of the season, but the early season struggles with injuries (losing MVP/Brownlow Medallist Mitchell from an already paper-thin midfield, then 3 games with 2-game ending injuries) made the climb almost impossible. Had they made 8th, they would quite possibly have made the PF, or even GF. (Richmond still had us covered IMO, the rest we could at least match or beat comfortably).

There hasn't been a team as stable or as dominant as Hawthorn was through that period 12-16 in the modern era, the Hawks the first team to really try to 'cash in' on an exceptional core group through 2009-2013 acquisitions. Richmond 17-21 could well be entering another super era already with their current group. Geelong through the 7-11 period would be close, but their senior addition top-ups didn't really start until near the end to extend their successful period, whilst Richmond appears to be more closely following the Hawthorn model (building before/during peak years). This could well be salary cap driven, as Hawthorn (infamously?) carried their cap forward through contract renegotiations from Clarkson's early year destructions right through the premiership era. It's a concept that doesn't appear to be working in the current FA/trade market, where acquisition requires a player to be paid above "Hawthorn market" wages.

Which way will Richmond go do you think? Do they have enough talent in the 21-23 to let maturity replace their oldest players organically? Will they chase older talent ala Geelong to try and succeed whilst Edwards/Cotchin/Jack/Rance are still around and Martin at his peak? Or will they look to beef up that lower-middle age group like Hawthorn had to 15-18 and try to be top-4 competitive.

Great reply, rankings are always tough to do formulaically and when it comes to Richmond I think they have more faith in their coaching/system to go down the Geelong path and actually come away with some silverware (crying noises) so I believe they will, however that is the riskier play and the smarter thing to do would spend some time toward the middle of the pack when this period of dominance starts slowing down, get some young talent, use their destination club status for some crucial trades and return to the top before the end of next the decade for a red-hot go at September success.

 

[Pessimistic]

Except for 2016 (Prestia trade), Richmond has used its first-rounder at every draft since 2004. Not comparable situations... yet.

Then we argue what is an elite pick. Most years hawthorn is not the top ten. richmond havent for three years now

 

[Furn2]

Average age, H&A season:

26.52 Hawthorn
26.43 Adelaide
26.21 Geelong
26.20 Collingwood
26.12 West Coast
25.80 North Melbourne
25.59 GWS
25.28 Essendon
25.22 Port Adelaide
25.20 Brisbane
25.03 Richmond
24.82 Melbourne
24.80 Fremantle
24.60 Carlton
24.44 Western Bulldogs
24.41 St.Kilda
24.37 Sydney
23.95 Gold Coast

While Richmond's GF team at 26.48 (with Rance to return) isn't young, there is quite a bit of youthful talent waiting for their chance - Stack, Graham, Balta, Higgins, Ross, Naish, Eggmolesse-Smith, Coleman-Jones, Collier-Dawkins, Garthwaite. The trick will be in blending these players into a side that is performing well. Barring another bad run with injury, there will be intense pressure for places in next year's team.

There's no correlation between average age and future performance, in fact the older lists do slightly better.

 

[hk89]

I'll be succinct as I can then:
Fingers, dykes, middle-table

Sounds like a saucy trip to Amsterdam, except you'd be under the table instead of mid-table.

 

[hk89]

Not sure. I would hope at this stage that any players from other clubs are mid-20's or younger rather than veterans. The club has already flagged that it won't be a major player in this year's trade period.

Stack has as much potential as any first-year player I've seen, just needs to stay grounded. He's the standout. Coleman-Jones is shaping very well and Balta has enormous potential without having found a position.

Obviously going to be hard to replace the stars without high picks, but the team is already transforming.

2016 B&F: Martin 1st, Rance 2nd, Cotchin 3rd, Riewoldt 4th
2017 B&F: Martin 1st, Rance 2nd, Cotchin 4th, Riewoldt 7th
2018 B&F: Riewoldt 1st, Martin 3rd, Rance 6th, Cotchin 7th
2019 B&F: Martin 6th, Cotchin 19th, Riewoldt 21st, Rance 34th

If Martin, Cotchin, Riewoldt and Rance had all played most of the season that would be a transformation, but the fact that Martin was the only one of those that played more than 14 games means it has nothing to do with transformation. Martin having a slow start to the year, and the other three injured for big chunks of the season does not a transformation make. I'd expect at least Martin, Cotchin and Rance to all figure strongly in your B&F next year. Its a great reflection of your depth though, making top 4 with three of your best out for long periods was a very decent achievement.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

There's no correlation between average age and future performance, in fact the older lists do slightly better.

Shhh, it’s Ron’s hobby horse and he won’t let it go.

 

[SSSSSS]

The draft is too volatile of a beast and should not be relied upon in it's entirety. For every Taranto and McCluggage there is a McGrath.

The best clubs will be the ones who can gain maximum value of all aspects of list management. Richmond have smashed this out of the park.

 

[Pessimistic]

Sounds like a saucy trip to Amsterdam, except you'd be under the table instead of mid-table.

How many fingers for the dyke? Maybe the old dutch tale got mis translated

 

[Ron The Bear]

There's no correlation between average age and future performance

Younger Richmond combinations were good enough to reach third place on the ladder, before the (near) full-strength team took over at the business end.

 

[Pessimistic]

Ive lost count of the number of premiers with a low average age predicted to go on to big things which didnt

2008 hawks would be one

 

[Ron The Bear]

Ive lost count of the number of premiers with a low average age predicted to go on to big things which didnt

2008 hawks would be one

Putting aside the fact that Richmond's premiership team isn't young, here's a list of highest differences between premiership team average and h&a average.

Year	Club	GF Avg Age	Diff	Year + 1	Year + 2	Year + 3	Year + 4
1908	Carl	27.29	+1.81	2nd	2nd	4th	3rd
1923	Ess	27.73	+1.58	1st	4th	3rd	8th
2019	Rich	26.48	+1.46
1971	Haw	24.31	+1.24	6th	7th	3rd	2nd
2004	P.A.	27.01	+1.19	6th	12th	2nd	13th
1903	Coll	27.55	+1.08	3rd	2nd	3rd	4th
2009	Geel	26.71	+1.06	3rd	1st	7th	3rd
2015	Haw	27.83	+1.01	5th	12th	5th	9th
1975	N.M.	26.62	+0.99	2nd	1st	2nd	3rd
1904	Fitz	24.45	+0.98	1st	2nd	5th	7th
2014	Haw	26.80	+0.96	1st	5th	12th	5th
2007	Geel	25.49	+0.96	2nd	1st	3rd	1st
1964	Melb	24.28	+0.94	7th	11th	7th	8th
1970	Carl	24.52	+0.92	5th	1st	2nd	7th
2002	Bris	26.36	+0.88	1st	2nd	11th	13th

Most of those teams gave themselves a shot in future seasons, except Melbourne who brought the Norm Smith curse upon themselves. And dare I suggest, your mob.

 

[Pessimistic]

I think that means we agree?

 

[Ron The Bear]

I think that means we agree?

Not sure. Young premiership teams like Hawthorn 2008, Collingwood 2010 and Bulldogs 2016 is a different topic.

Richmond's young-ish h&a team didn't win the flag, it just kept the club in the race.

 

[blaisee]

Comparing the top ranked teams at the end of the year comparing the age spread of their top-10 rated players.

Richmond: Martin, Prestia, Edwards, Lambert, Riewoldt, Cotchin, Caddy, Vlasutin, Nankervis, Grimes
GWS: Coniglio, Kelly, Whitfield, Cameron, Hopper, Himmelberg, Ward, Finlayson, Davis, Taranto
Geelong: Dangerfield, Ablett, Kelly, Hawkins, Selwood, Menegola, Duncan, Stanley, Blicavs, Toohey
Hawthorn: McEvoy, Bruest, Gunston, Sicily, Shiels, Henderson, O'Meara, Wingard, Burgoyne, Worpel

36 - Burgoyne
35 -
34 - Ablett,
33 -
32
31
30 - Edwards, Riewoldt, Selwood, Hawkins, Henderson
29 - Cotchin, Tuohy, Dangerfield, Ward, McEvoy
28 - Stanley, Blicavs, Davis, Bruest
27 - Martin, Lambert, Grimes, Duncan, Menegola, Shiels, Gunston
26 - Caddy, Prestia, Cameron,
25 - Vlasutin, Coniglio, Mitchell, Wingard, O'Meara
24 - Nankervis, T.Kelly, Whitfield, J.Kelly, Sicily
23 - Finlayson
22 - Himmelberg, Hopper
21 - Taranto
20 - Worpel

Two obvious outliers, then an even spread with some consistent weighting, Cats oldest, followed by Tigers, Hawks and then Giants significantly younger (and better) than any equivalents.

Not quite as misguided as the Carlton = Young, Hawks = Old comparison of last year but pretty close. Hawthorn match up well on the age profile of their top players with any competitive team other than GWS.

Looking at that list, you'd expect Geelong and Tigers to have biggest drop, with GWS biggest improvement.

Why is hawthorn in this conversation?

They finished 9th with the oldest team

They should be the youngest

 

[blaisee]

There's no correlation between average age and future performance, in fact the older lists do slightly better.

Well then why didn’t hawthorn do better?

I will tell you why, they are not very good, and old. This is not a good combination

 

[Pessimistic]

Well then why didn’t hawthorn do better?

I will tell you why, they are not very good, and old. This is not a good combination

Have you been under a rock?

2012 average age 25y81d lost GF to a team average age 26y182d
2013 agerage age 26y278d won GF over a team average age 26y62d
2014 average age 26y294d won GF over a team average age 26y309d
2015 average age 27y304d won GF over a team average age 25y341d ( a record age premiership team)

Have been working to stabilise the age profile since: the team which played r23 against the eagles has just 9 players remaining from the 2015 GF. The average age still over 27. 27y16d to be exact. The eagles team was 26y97d

 

[blaisee]

Have you been under a rock?

2012 average age 25y81d lost GF to a team average age 26y182d
2013 agerage age 26y278d won GF over a team average age 26y62d
2014 average age 26y294d won GF over a team average age 26y309d
2015 average age 27y304d won GF over a team average age 25y341d ( a record age premiership team)

Have been working to stabilise the age profile since: the team which played r23 against the eagles has just 9 players remaining from the 2015 GF. The average age still over 27. 27y16d to be exact. The eagles team was 26y97d

ΥΕΑ Ι know

Hawthorn haven’t won a final in 4 years cant attract an A grade free agent, are the oldest team in the league and finished ninth,
Have I missed anything ?

 

[threesixpio]

Get the feeling this thread may be irrelevant soon

 

[Pessimistic]

ΥΕΑ Ι know

Hawthorn haven’t won a final in 4 years cant attract an A grade free agent, are the oldest team in the league and finished ninth,
Have I missed anything ?

There havent been that many top free agents anyway

 

[Ron The Bear]

Have been working to stabilise the age profile

Interesting turn of phrase which has been used in various forms in the media.

No team suddenly says "we need to reduce our age profile" without performance suffering first. Performance is the driver; age is just a measure.

 

[WWSD]

Interesting turn of phrase which has been used in various forms in the media.

No team suddenly says "we need to reduce our age profile" without performance suffering first. Performance is the driver; age is just a measure.

The Hawks average age is “misleading”. For example the following players below aren’t in the best 22 but they bump that average age up slightly and they will be off the list next month being replaced by Patton (26), Frost (26) and a number of 18-19 year olds via the national draft.

There is also the possibility of the Hawks trading out some senior players come this trade period which should see that age demographic go down.

Birchall 31
Puopolo 31
Schoenmakers 29
Mirra 28
Mohr 31
Minchington 26