Dimma v Hird

[Barry_Badrinath]

Mate if you just wanted a Hardwick wank fest you should've posted this on the Richmond board.

Wallace has shown more then Hardwick at this stage.

At the same stage in his career at Richmond (3 years in) Wallace collected a spoon and the clubs biggest ever loss: 157 points. Richmond's combined losing margin this year was 167.

Not even close. A 12th place finish and a 9th place finish means shit all if you recruit older players and take only 3 picks in the national draft (which he did in both 2005 and 2008).

 

[LeatherPoison]

6 of your best 8 players were drafted under Wallace. Hardwick has done nothing.

Essendons best players were drafted by sheedy .. and were father sons anyway .. and one of them is 37 years old HA

 

[Grockadoc]

You cannot say that Dimma hasn't outperformed Terry Wallace. Yes, Wallace has held a better year in terms of productivity, but his best year was still 11-10-1 with a percentage of ~97. Wallace, in these seasons, had players such as Richo, Brown, Bowden, Johnson playing.

Damien had a season this year, of 10-11-1 and a percentage of ~112. It shows we are far more competitive, and, with a little bit more composure, and luck we would have won at least 4 more games. So, Damien has had a better season, overall, than Wallace has, with a younger list.

 

[Grockadoc]

2008: Terry Wallace Best Season

Finished 9th

11-10-1

Average Score For: 101.27
Average Score Against: 104
Differential: -2.73

Average Win: 32.54 points.
Average Loss: 41.8 points.



2012: Damien Hardwick Best Season

Finished 11th

10-11-1


Average Score For: 98.59
Average Score Against: 88.31
Differential: 10.28

Average Win: 39.3 points
Average Loss: 15.18 points.

So, we are -2.68 off our average score under Wallace, but we are 15.69 points better defensively.

Our Average Wins this season are up by 6.76 points, and our average loss has improved by a whopping 26.62 points.

Certainly a much better performance from Dimma in his best season, than Wallace's best season at the Tigers.

 

[TiggerMan22]

6 of your best 8 players were drafted under Wallace. Hardwick has done nothing.

Before Hardwick came only Deledio was at an elite level

 

[The Bomb]

1 thing about Hird is he can really get some good results from his players, they love playing for him, and in his 1st 2 seasons as coach has already coached a Brownlow medalist and Rising star winner, had a gun player in Goddard change clubs, and impressed Daniher enough for him to pick Essendon over GWS and Sydney who were throwing more money at him.

 

[Grockadoc]

The thing is though, Hird took over a club that had played finals 2 years before hand. So his list was already more developed than the list Wallace left Hardwick. So, if you are talking on improvements, Hardwick has Hird covered.

 

[The Bomb]

The thing is though, Hird took over a club that had played finals 2 years before hand. So his list was already more developed than the list Wallace left Hardwick. So, if you are talking on improvements, Hardwick has Hird covered.

a list which had Lloyd, Lucas, Lovett and McPhee, Even more amazing Hird made the finals without these 4 players playing a single game.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

The thing is though, Hird took over a club that had played finals 2 years before hand. So his list was already more developed than the list Wallace left Hardwick. So, if you are talking on improvements, Hardwick has Hird covered.

Hird took over a club that had just finished 14th, Hardwick took over a club that had just finished 15th, they have both improved there teams, have both moved there teams up by 3 positions and most importantly shown the ability to beat and be competitive with the best teams. It's really just too early to tell.

 

[TiggerMan22]

a list which had Lloyd, Lucas, Lovett and McPhee, Even more amazing Hird made the finals without these 4 players playing a single game.

Hardwick lost Richo, Brown, Coughlan, Bowden, Simmonds, Cousins, Johnson in his first year

 

[boncer34]

At the same stage in his career at Richmond (3 years in) Wallace collected a spoon and the clubs biggest ever loss: 157 points. Richmond's combined losing margin this year was 167.

Not even close. A 12th place finish and a 9th place finish means shit all if you recruit older players and take only 3 picks in the national draft (which he did in both 2005 and 2008).

Good thing Hardwick doesn't believe in picking up older players then.

 

[TiggerMan22]

Good thing Hardwick doesn't believe in picking up older players then.

What are you talking about? He said recruit older players AND only take 3 picks in the draft. Hardwick recruits older players but youth still uses the normal amount of picks in the draft. They are completely different things.

 

[boncer34]

What are you talking about? He said recruit older players AND only take 3 picks in the draft. Hardwick recruits older players but youth still uses the normal amount of picks in the draft. They are completely different things.

How many picks will Richmond use this year?

 

[TiggerMan22]

How many picks will Richmond use this year?

4 or 5 in the ND.

 

[THRILLHO]

You cannot say that Dimma hasn't outperformed Terry Wallace. Yes, Wallace has held a better year in terms of productivity, but his best year was still 11-10-1 with a percentage of ~97. Wallace, in these seasons, had players such as Richo, Brown, Bowden, Johnson playing.

Damien had a season this year, of 10-11-1 and a percentage of ~112. It shows we are far more competitive, and, with a little bit more composure, and luck we would have won at least 4 more games. So, Damien has had a better season, overall, than Wallace has, with a younger list.

This is a weird post.

Wallace gets marked down because he had his top players playing good football, but you don't mention Hardwick's top end playing so well. Hardwick's best players are younger than Wallace's best players but it would be difficult to claim that just because the four I've outlined below are younger that they're going to improve significantly.

Richmond supporters claim Trent Cotchin is the best player in the league or thereabouts

Reiwoldt won the Coleman medal and with his body shape and size, seems to be playing pretty close to his optimal level. He might be good for ten more goals per season when fully developed. FF around the 70 goal mark.

Deledio is youngish still but this season probably points to his optimal level as well. Will play out his career as a top 30 guy, in the AA squad, breaking into the AA every other year.

Apart from the issue of age, Hardwick has just as good top end (probably even better) players than Wallace had at his disposal and yet, Hardwick's team was still outperformed by Wallace's.

Richmond's improvement won't come from these guys. It'll come from the C grade guys pushing up to become B grade players and their D grade players pushing up to become C grade. And that's the weakness that everyone else sees. Richmond relies on their top end talent almost more than any other club in the league and just as much as Wallace did.

How often would you envisage the 12th best team having the Coleman medalist, runner-up Brownlow medalist, AFLCA winner, two AA players and a flip of the coin for the third (Coleman medalist).

I just think Richmond supporters are so keen to demonise Wallace at every chance and are so hopeful that Hardwick is their salvation that they will do anything to denigrate Wallace while simultaneously talking up Hardwick.

 

[Fat Nyfe]

Tough call, good poll.

Hird has done well with an average looking list. Made the finals last year and exploded out of the blocks this year before falling away due to injuries. I think he's been a bit underrated on bigfooty, he's done the most with what he's got.

Hardwick began with a list in appalling condition and turned it around in a very short amount of time. You only need to think back a couple years where Richmond were getting flogged in every game in 2010, compared to 2012 where they could match it with the best. The list still looks very average, which to me says he's installed a fiercer mindset into the C/B grade players to get the best out of themselves.

Right now I'd vote Hird. Both teams in similar positions next year eyeing finals, so 2013 will tell the tale

 

[Slattery_20]

Neither coach has proven anything although I don't understand why everyone seems to rate Hardwick so highly.

Pretty much this.

 

[Slattery_20]

I just think Richmond supporters are so keen to demonise Wallace at every chance and are so hopeful that Hardwick is their salvation that they will do anything to denigrate Wallace while simultaneously talking up Hardwick.

To be fair, Hird cops the same w.r.t Knights.
Both coaches have made some good calls, some bad calls.
Both have had sides playing good footy when they've been up, and bad footy at other points.

Both have some guns, a small sprinkling of quality older guys, more than their fair share of young guns, and a few problem children & unfulfilled talents.

Hardwick came in with an obvious agenda (turn the list over), Hird probably didn't (*possibly had an agenda the other way - stabilise the list & club).

Neither have really achieved much.
I dare say Richmond's recruiting this year points to a change of direction. You don't go picking up 3 x 26-27 year olds for the long haul. Will be interesting to see how they integrate, how much worth they have. Neither club have done particularly well with mature pickups in the last decade.

 

[Slattery_20]

The thing is though, Hird took over a club that had played finals 2 years before hand. So his list was already more developed than the list Wallace left Hardwick. So, if you are talking on improvements, Hardwick has Hird covered.

To a certain degree, yes, but there was a fairly big turnover between 2009, and when Hird came in. 2009's list/side had guys like Lloyd, McPhee, Welsh, Lucas, Lovett, Skipworth, Neagle - all gone by 2011. And he's barely ever had Gumby, Winderlich or Pears on the park either - pretty much our spine right there.

Not too far different to Richo, Simmonds, Bowden, Johnson leaving, prior to Hardwick.

Both had to find a lot of players, quickly. Hird came a year after guys like Melksham et al were blooded, but we weren't much closer to finding the spine.

 

[EasternTiger]

This is a weird post.

Wallace gets marked down because he ultimately failed in his task. There are certainly factors that did not help him such as lack of resources, poor recruiting and development etc. He was innovative, and had an exciting list in his first few years at the Dogs.

He went ok early on (05 was almost identical to essendon's 2012 campaign) and got the supporters excited about the following year. The injury to Nathan Brown probably masked deficiencies in the list 'If only Brownie didn't go down' and we thought we'd be a lock-in if everyone was fit and on the park. Pretty much identical to what we're hearing from essendon supporters.

Having said that your post shows you have taken a short-cut to thinking, and have just regurgitated what you've read elsewhere. You set the tone beautifully with the first line though.

 

[Grockadoc]

Apart from the issue of age, Hardwick has just as good top end (probably even better) players than Wallace had at his disposal and yet, Hardwick's team was still outperformed by Wallace's.

I just think Richmond supporters are so keen to demonise Wallace at every chance and are so hopeful that Hardwick is their salvation that they will do anything to denigrate Wallace while simultaneously talking up Hardwick.

I am not demonising Terry Wallace. He made the best of what he could, with what he had. What I do have an issue with, is the people who claim Hardwick hasn't performed as well as, or better than Wallace, given that Hardwick has had a statistically better season at the Tigers, than Wallace's best.


Also, Thrillho, what you said about Wallace's team outperforming Damien's, is plain false. The only thing that Wallace had going for him in his best season, was one more win than Dimma this year, which should not have been so, given our 3 losses under 6 points, and we scored a few more points per game. Damien, this season, had Wallace covered in everything else.

2008: Terry Wallace Best Season

Finished 9th

11-10-1

Average Score For: 101.27
Average Score Against: 104
Differential: -2.73

Average Win: 32.54 points.
Average Loss: 41.8 points.



2012: Damien Hardwick Best Season

Finished 11th

10-11-1


Average Score For: 98.59
Average Score Against: 88.31
Differential: 10.28

Average Win: 39.3 points
Average Loss: 15.18 points.

So, we are -2.68 off our average score under Wallace, but we are 15.69 points better defensively.

Our Average Wins this season are up by 6.76 points, and our average loss has improved by a whopping 26.62 points.

Certainly a much better performance from Dimma in his best season, than Wallace's best season at the Tigers.

 

[Donakebab]

Wallace gets marked down because he ultimately failed in his task. There are certainly factors that did not help him such as lack of resources, poor recruiting and development etc. He was innovative, and had an exciting list in his first few years at the Dogs.

He went ok early on (05 was almost identical to essendon's 2012 campaign) and got the supporters excited about the following year. The injury to Nathan Brown probably masked deficiencies in the list 'If only Brownie didn't go down' and we thought we'd be a lock-in if everyone was fit and on the park. Pretty much identical to what we're hearing from essendon supporters.

Having said that your post shows you have taken a short-cut to thinking, and have just regurgitated what you've read elsewhere. You set the tone beautifully with the first line though.

That's a long bow to draw.

 

[Grockadoc]

That's a long bow to draw.

To be honest, before he went down, Nathan Brown, of 2005 was widely considered to be the best player in the competition at the time, and his position was the one we had the least depth in at that time. When he went down, our team played horribly. Not really a long bow to draw, as even Terry Wallace acknowledged that a fit Brown would have made things a little bit easier.

 

[Slattery_20]

Also, Thrillho, what you said about Wallace's team outperforming Damien's, is plain false.

Certainly a much better performance from Dimma in his best season, than Wallace's best season at the Tigers.

11.5 wins & 9th (1 more win would have put you into finals)
vs
10.5 wins & 11th (4 whole wins from finals)


Not even up for debate.

The only thing that Wallace had going for him in his best season, was one more win than Dimma this year, which should not have been so, given our 3 losses under 6 points, and we scored a few more points per game. Damien, this season, had Wallace covered in everything else.

Only thing Sydney had going for them this year was wins. As if that doesn't matter!!!

1 win out vs 4 wins out
9th vs 11th
11.5 vs 10.5
Games against GWS & GC vs no games against GWS & GC

Any which way you like to cut it, Richmond performed better in 2008 than in 2012.


Just looked at your 2008 draw as well.
Lost to North (7th), Pies (8th), drew with Dogs (3rd), lost to Hawks (1st) Saints (4th) Cats (2nd), Sydney (6th) Adelaide (5th), Carlton (11th), Geelong (2nd) Adelaide (5th). That is a horror draw. Literally only one game against a non-finals side you did not win.

This year you dropped 4.5 games to Essendon, Port, GC, Carlton who missed finals. Pretty easy draw. I'm sorry but good sides just do not drop a handful of games to crap/mediocre sides.

 

[Donakebab]

To be honest, before he went down, Nathan Brown, of 2005 was widely considered to be the best player in the competition at the time, and his position was the one we had the least depth in at that time. When he went down, our team played horribly. Not really a long bow to draw, as even Terry Wallace acknowledged that a fit Brown would have made things a little bit easier.

It's a massive bow to draw. One single player compared to a massive injury list. Complete bullshit, zero relevance.