Further boost our defensive stocks...

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

Aside from the players we selected I was really surprised at the club's position that we needed to "further boost our defensive stocks".

Pre draft we had 38 players on our list. Of these 38, for mine:

1) Schoey and Boumann are genuine key defenders

2) Gibbo, Stratts, Litherland and Gilham are third talls/pinch hit key defenders.

3) Birch, Langford, Murphy and Cheney are medium/running defenders.

4) Guerra, Pops, Suckling and Duryea are smaller defenders.

Take out our rucks and over 40% of our list is defenders.

In addition, Burgoyne, Ellis, Hodge and Bruce can all play off half back.

Appreciate guys like Suckling and Pops can play further up the field, but then again guys Whitecross and Gunston can come back for us also.

Kelly seems like he will join our ever growing list of third talls/pinch hit key defenders. I don't prescribe to some people's theories that you draft 192cm blokes as genuine key defenders in today's game.

I am therefore interested from those that have an inside line into the club or considered opinions as to why we need to boost our defence in this area.

I can only think that the club sees a number of players across our defensive stocks being retired, delisted, traded or moved out of defence in the next few years.

Anyone else feel the same way?

 

[whiteTiga2k]

I'm guessing we just want options in case a defender is found wanting like Schoey was last year in the first Qualifying final.

I do agree with you tho. I thought we already boosted our stock with the recruitment of Boumann, as he can only be played as a Defender. I actually thought our main aim was speed, a tough midfielder and a tall forward in case Rough doesn't come up.

Queries on the selection of Hill... Praying that I am put firmly back in my place. But yeah, thought pick 33 could of been better spent.

 

[GoldenHodge]

I guess it seems like the Hawthorn recruiters have listened to the critics too much who think we need more defenders. We have so many defenders but I imagine there will still be critics who think we need to draft more defenders. Maybe some of these defenders can find other positions in the team.

 

[Davo23]

Aside from the players we selected I was really surprised at the club's position that we needed to "further boost our defensive stocks".

Pre draft we had 38 players on our list. Of these 38, for mine:

1) Schoey and Boumann are genuine key defenders

2) Gibbo, Stratts, Litherland and Gilham are third talls/pinch hit key defenders.

3) Birch, Langford, Murphy and Cheney are medium/running defenders.

4) Guerra, Pops, Suckling and Duryea are smaller defenders.

Take out our rucks and over 40% of our list is defenders.

In addition, Burgoyne, Ellis, Hodge and Bruce can all play off half back.

Appreciate guys like Suckling and Pops can play further up the field, but then again guys Whitecross and Gunston can come back for us also.

Kelly seems like he will join our ever growing list of third talls/pinch hit key defenders. I don't prescribe to some people's theories that you draft 192cm blokes as genuine key defenders in today's game.

I am therefore interested from those that have an inside line into the club or considered opinions as to why we need to boost our defence in this area.

I can only think that the club sees a number of players across our defensive stocks being retired, delisted, traded or moved out of defence in the next few years.

Anyone else feel the same way?

I thought our defence was good last year.

But posters still want to dredge up the "we need gorilla" stupidity ...



.

 

[2008wasoverDEW!]

I guess it seems like the Hawthorn recruiters have listened to the critics too much who think we need more defenders. We have so many defenders but I imagine there will still be critics who think we need to draft more defenders. Maybe some of these defenders can find other positions in the team.

With Gilham coming back from a knee reco, & Boumann, Litherland, & even Schoenmakers yet to establish themselves as AFL standard key defenders, I can understand the selection of Jordan Kelly.
At the very least it gives us greater depth in this department. As we are all aware, not all our defenders will make it in the AFL. But that will be decided by whoever makes the most of their opportunities whilst on our list. A bit of healthy competition for spots is a good issue to have!

 

[RIOLINWITPUNCHS]

Murphy's Law.

If we didn't pick up Kelly/Boumann we would have been in all sorts next year in defence without a doubt.

Now that we have a surplus, no defender will get injured all year and these new guys wont be required.

 

[Raymann]

Aside from the players we selected I was really surprised at the club's position that we needed to "further boost our defensive stocks".

Pre draft we had 38 players on our list. Of these 38, for mine:

1) Schoey and Boumann are genuine key defenders

2) Gibbo, Stratts, Litherland and Gilham are third talls/pinch hit key defenders.

3) Birch, Langford, Murphy and Cheney are medium/running defenders.

4) Guerra, Pops, Suckling and Duryea are smaller defenders.

Take out our rucks and over 40% of our list is defenders.

In addition, Burgoyne, Ellis, Hodge and Bruce can all play off half back.

Appreciate guys like Suckling and Pops can play further up the field, but then again guys Whitecross and Gunston can come back for us also.

Kelly seems like he will join our ever growing list of third talls/pinch hit key defenders. I don't prescribe to some people's theories that you draft 192cm blokes as genuine key defenders in today's game.

I am therefore interested from those that have an inside line into the club or considered opinions as to why we need to boost our defence in this area.

I can only think that the club sees a number of players across our defensive stocks being retired, delisted, traded or moved out of defence in the next few years.

Anyone else feel the same way?

i think the recruitment of Kelly is an eye on the future. Both Gilham & Gibbo are 28 this year. It gives the Hawks a couple of years to get Kelly to thier level making the transition seamless.

I call it smart recruiting... Kudos Mr Wright.

 

[dermott]

i think the recruitment of Kelly is an eye on the future. Both Gilham & Gibbo are 28 this year. It gives the Hawks a couple of years to get Kelly to thier level making the transition seamless.

I call it smart recruiting... Kudos Mr Wright.

Exactly! By the time Gilham and Gibson are gone in 3-4 years, Kelly and Litherland should be ready for AFL.

Also not every draft pick will make the grade (Lisle, Dowler and Thorp spring to mind) so you need to keep a few KPPs in the system or you will get caught out.
We have 40 players on the list (incl veterans) and 6 or 8 rookies (I keep forgetting with scholarship rookies etc) so we really can afford to have a number of developing talls on the list. In fact I don't think we can really afford not to.

 

[Neville Bartos]

Indeed. I think our recruitment of youngsters over the last 2 years has been with an eye for 3-5 years into the future. Hallahan, Woodward, Schneider are all possible replacements for Sewell/Mitchell/Burgoyne when they start to slow down. Boumann, Litherland and Kelly are long-term replacements for Gibbo and Gilham. Puopolo a replacement for Guerra, Gunston is a replacement for Osborne, Hill is a replacement for Bateman and so on.

 

[jpzhawk]

well nobody thought or predicted we would select kelly , hill or woodward . shows how much we know about the thoughts going on amongst the round table . for all we know , kelly may be groomed into being a solid chf as backup for roughy to complement gunston being backup for buddy and eventually both of them taking over both mantles as roughy and buddy age a bit . we let lisle go , who could play both ends but lacked speed . maybe kelly is better and quicker ? anything is possible and most players can be groomed into new pozzies . i have read that kelly has played a little up forward already so who knows .

 

[THEHIGHFLYINGHAWKER]

I guess it seems like the Hawthorn recruiters have listened to the critics too much who think we need more defenders. We have so many defenders but I imagine there will still be critics who think we need to draft more defenders. Maybe some of these defenders can find other positions in the team.

quantity doesn't always mean quality. obviously they felt we needed a boost in that area.

 

[Taskmaster]

I thought our defence was good last year.

But posters still want to dredge up the "we need gorilla" stupidity ...



.

Thank-You Davo, someone talking actual sense.

There are some on this forum that will never be happy with the players we do or do not draft!

That Kelly kid looks a likely type and as for Hill, if he is half as good as his brother, then I think we have done well. Clarko knows what he wants and gets it, just look at Bud, Rough, Lewis and the likes. Who would have thought poppy at pick 66 would have been a star...?

Seriously, the club will do what is best for the Hawthorn Football Club and its members. The club are setting themselves up for a massive 2012 and beyond!

 

[Easy Slips Catch]

Agree we have quantity rather than quality. Stratts is probably our only defender capable of beating his opponent and winning the footy. The rest are average stoppers and very good rebounders but nigh on useless on winning the ball.

Before I get yelled down, Gibbo got 2 times 2 PCM votes in the 6 games V WC, Pies and Cats. In the big games we have a noticable deficiency.

Now trot out our stats V the tigs and other numpties.

 

[Hawkinspired]

Too much emphasis is placed on a mere centimeter or two. Just in case you didn't notice the game is evolving very quickly. The game is more defensive than ever and big, slow defenders, no matter how good there body work or spoiling ability is, simply have no place in the modern game. Closing speed, elite skills and general ability to hold your place in the press is far more critical.

Guys like Cloke and Pods will dominate just as Franklin and Roughead will. I rate Harry Taylor as one of the best key forwards and individually he was toweled up by Cloke in the first half of the GF. Lonagan went to him and with help and chop outs from other defenders, plus starving him of the ball they were able to take him out of the game.

Key to stopping the forwards is a) stopping supply and b) having many defenders that can work well as a team. We have simply identified that these are the types of defenders we need. As much as it is pumped up height doesn't account for much. Just look at Boumann. Everyone here instantly rates him because he is 196cm. Slip down to training this pre season and you'll see that Birchall looks huge next to him.

 

[Prudster]

Before I get yelled down, Gibbo got 2 times 2 PCM votes in the 6 games V WC, Pies and Cats. In the big games we have a noticable deficiency.

Now trot out our stats V the tigs and other numpties.

Just looking at those games in isolation, we have noticeable deficiencies in all areas of the ground, because, at times, we were dominated in all areas. Maybe we should start the rebuild now

 

[hawker39]

The club doesn't want a gorilla defender. If we draft someone 194cm+ it will be as a key forward.

The Match Committee wants 2 types of defenders:
1 - attacking rebounders such as Suckling and Birchall and even Burgoyne if used there. Gibson would be great here as well but he is our best defender but will get worn out if he has to play that way for the next 2 seasons.
2 - Actual defenders - Stratton and........... now Kelly

The others such as Shoenmakers, Gillham are tall players not that good a one on ones. We must be more competitive at 1 vs 1.

So this draft gave us outside speed in Hill (we need that)
an accountable tall defender - Kelly and we do need that
and an inside quick clearance player -we actually do not have one of these at all (Woodward).

It addresses weaknesses and also plans for the years ahead.

A central midfield that in 3 years will have Shiels, Whitecross, Woodward, Hallahan, Ellis, Rioli (maybe) is not good enough but the 2012 and 2013 hopefully will take care of this.

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Realistically, in today's footy, just about everyone is a defender and has to be able to beat his own man. Having more people to rotate through the are is a plus.

 

[seysearles]

I don't see why everyone is calling him a 3rd tall. He's 192cms at the age of 18 and although comparatively light now looks like he has the sort of build that will really thicken up. I wouldn't be surprised if eventually they could get him up to around the 95kg mark with the right training program. He may even grow a cm or 2. I mean he's the same height as Matthew Scarlett and Darren Glass and is taller than Trent Croad and Mick Martyn. I see no reason why he can't eventually become the big body in defence we have been looking for.

Jordan Kelly
Height: 192cm
Weight: 81kg

vs

Brian Lake
Height: 195 cm
Weight: 104 kg

Daniel Merrett
Height: 196cm
Weight: 104kg

James Frawley
Height: 193 cm
Weight: 95 kg

Matthew Scarlett
Height: 192cm
Weight: 94 kg

Darren Glass
Height: 192cm
Weight: 94kg

Stephen Gilham
Height: 192cm
Weight: 86kg

Ryan Schoenmakers
Height: 193 cm
Weight: 88 kg

Ben Stratton
Height: 190 cm
Weight: 89 kg

Trent Croad
Height: 190cm
Weight: 92kg

Chris Langford
Height: 193 cm
Weight: 96 kg

Stephen Silvagni
Height: 194 cm
Weight: 95 kg

Mick Martyn
Height: 190cm
Weight: 105kg

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

Picking guys who played 10 years ago isn't that relevant I would have thought. Neither is picking blokes that play as back pockets.

Better to focus on current key defenders like:

Dustin Fletcher
198 cm

Tom Lonergan
197cm

Ben Reid
195cm

Zac Dawson
195cm

Luke PmCpharlin
193cm

In addition, it is worth looking at the top guys that are being drafted now as key forwards. Most of them are a lot closer to 200cm than 190cm.

 

[RIOLINWITPUNCHS]

By the sounds of this Patton fella I don't think there is guna be a defender in the land that could stop him in a few years.

 

[seysearles]

Picking guys who played 10 years ago isn't that relevant I would have thought. Neither is picking blokes that play as back pockets.

Better to focus on current key defenders like:

Dustin Fletcher
198 cm

Not sure you can compare Fletched with Kelly as Fletcher isnt a body on body positional player. Is more of a grappler and is a pretty rare beast to be honest.

Tom Lonergan
197cm

Not a career defender, was only switched there after opportunities up fwd dried up. Uses height and weight well but does not have great positioning skills.

Ben Reid
195cm

Very good defender and serves as an example of how a young player can develop into a key position player. Was listed as 193cm, 82.3kg when drafted and now is 195cm, 102kg.

Zac Dawson
195cm

Is shit. Shows that height does not = good fullback

Luke McPharlin
193cm

Probably the best of the typical big bodied full backs you have listed and he's basically the same height as Kelly.

In addition, it is worth looking at the top guys that are being drafted now as key forwards. Most of them are a lot closer to 200cm than 190cm.

The key is to bulk the kid up. If you can get him to the weight of these other guys (93-98kg) he has enough height and seems to have the skill-set to play as a typical key position defender in the mould of MacPharlin et al.

 

[crazywildhorse]

The team is going to change it's name to the 'Half-Back Hawks'.

 

[seysearles]

To me this is who we should be comparing Kelly to:

JAMES FRAWLEY
Draft height 192.7cm
Draft weight 81.3kg

Current Height: 193 cm
Current Weight: 95 kg

 

[Consumed]

I thought our defence was good last year.

But posters still want to dredge up the "we need gorilla" stupidity ...



.

Good post.

Look at the best few defenders in the league, they are not giants.
Scarlett is 192cm and took quite a few years before he was the premier back in the league.

Fletcher is taller, but thin as a rake. He still does the job.

Some posters believe personal stats such as height, weight and speed tell the story. These guys need to get with the program. Modern coaches like Clarko would laugh at their understanding of the game.

According to these posters Hawks have no defence, well we ended up third, 3 points off another GF, and one of the best defensive records over the season. This was with no Gilham and Stratts. How much better does our backline need to be?

 

[Easy Slips Catch]

The term gorilla gets trotted out pretty easily. We do not have a KP defender who can win a one on one - not just break even. Gibbo has the frame but not the height and he was our best defender by a mile. None of our KP defenders are competent one on one.

We had the third best defence in 2011. The club is not happy with that and paid overs to make sure we got Boumann.