Autopsy Round 22, 2022: Richmond roast Hawks

[Guardian Hawk]

DGB, Blanck & Jeka are rippers! Great to see them being thrown into the deep end. Fight your way out of it, didn't hide in their shells.

Who wants to be a defender at the Hawks, when the ball is coming down like that?

21-6 inside 50s, in the 1st quarter.

If only we had a brownlow medallist and vice captain to show ANY form of leadership.

I see some have seen the light with regards to T.Mitchell. Last game for Hawks in Tassie?

I don't want to get into an argument but your mind is made up, regardless of how Mitchell plays. Firstly, you are being misleading in highlighting the inside 50 count in the first qtr alone when (a) they only 3 had more inside 50's across the whole game, (b) most of their 'prolific' scoring was done after the first quarter, when Hawthorn won the inside 50 count, (c) at one point the graphic came up that Richmond had scored from 92% of their entries for the quarter (nearly all were goals too) which is almost unprecedentedly high and (d) Lynch was not marking quick, clean unstoppable entries on his chest - he was taking contested pack marks at the top of the goal square that really should have been brought to ground (notwithstanding that he was awesome and our backline is inexperienced).

That you somehow find a way to make this all Mitchell's fault is unfair in my view. Nearly everyone played poorly. Mitchell attended just 44% of Hawthorn's CBA's against Richmond (others in the 70's and 80's). Yet, he still won more of the ball than anyone else. He won the (equal) most contested ball of any Hawk. He still easily had the most effective disposals on the ground. He had the most score involvements. He had the equal most goal assists. His disposal efficiency was much higher than any other midfielder. His ball use going inside 50 was the best of any Hawk. Yes, he had a bad turnover that was focussed on but he put the ball on a platter plenty of other times (for Gunston, for Moore, etc) that was simply overlooked whilst others continually just blazed away aimlessly. In all honesty, if any other player on the ground (especially a younger player) had the game Mitchell had, everyone (including you) would be singing their praises. Tom Mitchell is not one of the many reasons we lost yesterday.

 

[TheFourPillars]

I don't want to get into an argument but your mind is made up, regardless of how Mitchell plays. Firstly, you are being misleading in highlighting the inside 50 count in the first qtr alone when (a) they only 3 had more inside 50's across the whole game, (b) most of their 'prolific' scoring was done after the first quarter, when Hawthorn won the inside 50 count, (c) at one point the graphic came up that Richmond had scored from 92% of their entries for the quarter (nearly all were goals too) which is almost unprecedentedly high and (d) Lynch was not marking quick, clean unstoppable entries on his chest - he was taking contested pack marks at the top of the goal square that really should have been brought to ground (notwithstanding that he was awesome and our backline is inexperienced).

That you somehow find a way to make this all Mitchell's fault is unfair in my view. Nearly everyone played poorly. Mitchell attended just 44% of Hawthorn's CBA's against Richmond (others in the 70's and 80's). Yet, he still won more of the ball than anyone else. He won the (equal) most contested ball of any Hawk. He still easily had the most effective disposals on the ground. He had the most score involvements. He had the equal most goal assists. His disposal efficiency was much higher than any other midfielder. His ball use going inside 50 was the best of any Hawk. Yes, he had a bad turnover that was focussed on but he put the ball on a platter plenty of other times (for Gunston, for Moore, etc) that was simply overlooked whilst others continually just blazed away aimlessly. In all honesty, if any other player on the ground (especially a younger player) had the game Mitchell had, everyone (including you) would be singing their praises. Tom Mitchell is not one of the many reasons we lost yesterday.

I agree with you Mitchell had more than serviceable game was in our best few

 

[Nastyfish]

I tend to look at us in year one of a rebuild.

I think we've had six players debut under Sam this year? Finn has played regularly too, Nash around the middle. Morris was given a block and looked best 22 before injury. Reeves has become our no 1 ruck when fit.

Top of my head, I can only think of Day and Brockman that were given regular games under Clarko early on the past two years.

It's been a great start to the rebuild, but there's plenty of work ahead. We're trying to fast track years of poor decision making and neglecting the draft.

A rebuild is rarely linear, so no guarantees we improve win-loss next year, but we're on the right track in developing talent and getting games into our young talent as quickly as possible.

Such a calm and rationale post, be careful or you will derail this thread!

The stocks down back look very good with all back to full health. Our back six can be as good as anyones with organic growth and experience. Up forward there are gaps, looming larger as Breust and Gunston come to the end. A fast pressure forward like Maurice Rioli is a key need.

But the midfield is where it starts and that’s where we need a major injection of pace, hardness and skill. No defence could survive the midfield obliteration we suffered in that game.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

I tend to look at us in year one of a rebuild.

I think we've had six players debut under Sam this year? Finn has played regularly too, Nash around the middle. Morris was given a block and looked best 22 before injury. Reeves has become our no 1 ruck when fit.

Top of my head, I can only think of Day and Brockman that were given regular games under Clarko early on the past two years.

It's been a great start to the rebuild, but there's plenty of work ahead. We're trying to fast track years of poor decision making and neglecting the draft.

A rebuild is rarely linear, so no guarantees we improve win-loss next year, but we're on the right track in developing talent and getting games into our young talent as quickly as possible.

Good summary of where we are at. Yes we finally hit the draft a few years in a row - but given the exposure that young players were given this year and the lack of games given to Clarko favourites (Ceglar moved on, Shiels and Howe playing a handful of games only) and the fact that we are only one year into Sam's reign as coach and implementation of a new culture and gameplan - it's not outlandish to say this is the first true year of the rebuild.

 

[H00t]

Good summary of where we are at. Yes we finally hit the draft a few years in a row - but given the exposure that young players were given this year and the lack of games given to Clarko favourites (Ceglar moved on, Shiels and Howe playing a handful of games only) and the fact that we are only one year into Sam's reign as coach and implementation of a new culture and gameplan - it's not outlandish to say this is the first true year of the rebuild.

To add to this we only took 4 picks inside the top 30 in 2019 and 2020. We’ve had some list turnover but it’s not like we’ve gone hard at the draft in those years rather we just didn’t trade out.

Tigers had 5 top 30 picks last year alone.

This year to me feels the first year we’ve put youth at the forefront. Especially in the way we set up on the field.

 

[A Diakos]

Nobody is accepting shitness - we are accepting the reality of a rebuild and not throwing the toys out of the cot when we lose some games during it. We had huge list turnover last year - we tried to move on players but the offers either didn't come or the players who did get offers said no. The club can't force players out at gunpoint.

And Geelong missed the finals in 2006 and 2015.

2 misses in almost 20 years and a pending flag

Geelong haven’t accepted “the reality” they have made good decisions to stay up

Accepting reality and accepting “shitness “ gets blurred into one after a certain time frame

 

[KermitJagger]

Good summary of where we are at. Yes we finally hit the draft a few years in a row - but given the exposure that young players were given this year and the lack of games given to Clarko favourites (Ceglar moved on, Shiels and Howe playing a handful of games only) and the fact that we are only one year into Sam's reign as coach and implementation of a new culture and gameplan - it's not outlandish to say this is the first true year of the rebuild.

This is where it gets murky with the definition of a rebuild, Melbourne were terrible for over a decade and a half before winning a flag in 2020. Were they rebuilding that entire time? I'd say their proper rebuild started in around 2014, but it's not outlandish to say that they were rebuilding since the early 00s given the lack of success. Same goes for Carlton. Same again for us, did it start in 2001 because of Mitchell and Hodge or did it start in 2004 with all the changes we made there. Ultimately it doesn't matter much.

 

[burner1]

To add to this we only took 4 picks inside the top 30 in 2019 and 2020. We’ve had some list turnover but it’s not like we’ve gone hard at the draft in those years rather we just didn’t trade out.

Tigers had 5 top 30 picks last year alone.

This year to me feels the first year we’ve put youth at the forefront. Especially in the way we set up on the field.

Yep. A very noticeable shift in selection and approach this year (except for a month in middle where we started to fall apart). Not trading out your draft picks (2019/20) is not rebuilding.

A very interesting off season ahead. We didn’t really get much done last year. Get thumped next week as well and the list management team will have a nice reality check on the work to do.

 

[badgrill]

What are you talking about? Which premiership side has a better draft hand than us this year and last?

Norf. Won the Yoof Flag

 

[Ned Ryerson]

2 misses in almost 20 years and a pending flag

Geelong haven’t accepted “the reality” they have made good decisions to stay up

Accepting reality and accepting “shitness “ gets blurred into one after a certain time frame

Okay - what are you even talking about now? We tried the top up method and it failed spectacularly - now we have to go through the rebuild. We are in the infancy of doing so and you are having a cry about accepting 'shitness' - nobody is accepting that. Those of us with some patience are just accepting that this isn't going to be an overnight fix and enjoy what green shoots there have been this year. I am not exactly sure what it is you want the club to be doing right now that it isn't already doing?

Geelong might finally win out with the top-up method this year - and they absolutely have to. If they don't then it won't be pretty in a few years when the 12 <30-year old players on their list start to decline or retire.

 

[H00t]

This is where it gets murky with the definition of a rebuild, Melbourne were terrible for over a decade and a half before winning a flag in 2020. Were they rebuilding that entire time? I'd say their proper rebuild started in around 2014, but it's not outlandish to say that they were rebuilding since the early 00s given the lack of success. Same goes for Carlton. Same again for us, did it start in 2001 because of Mitchell and Hodge or did it start in 2004 with all the changes we made there. Ultimately it doesn't matter much.

It’s definitely an interesting conundrum. Is it when you get the players in that’s the rebuild or the change in philosophy that comes with a new coach.

Most of the time I feel it is a lot of rebuilds rather than one long rebuild until one takes hold and the improvement comes.

Carlton had a rebuild under Pagan, Ratten, the implosion with Malthouse, then Bolton and Teague had a go. Before Voss has finally got them pointed in the right direction.

The trick is to not have too many failed attempts before getting it right.

 

[KermitJagger]

It’s definitely an interesting conundrum. Is it when you get the players in that’s the rebuild or the change in philosophy that comes with a new coach.

Most of the time I feel it is a lot of rebuilds rather than one long rebuild until one takes hold and the improvement comes.

Carlton had a rebuild under Pagan, Ratten, the implosion with Malthouse, then Bolton and Teague had a go. Before Voss has finally got them pointed in the right direction.

The trick is to not have too many failed attempts before getting it right.

Rebuild is far too narrow a term IMO, but we AFL supporters love a buzzword!

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Rebuild is far too narrow a term IMO, but we AFL supporters love a buzzword!

Wholistic structural reconfiguration?

 

[Dewyyyyy]

This will not be popular but I didn't think Mitchell was that bad and people are unfairly harsh on him. If anyone else had the game he had, they would be getting praised. A lot of our players commit regular turnovers but his get illuminates to the nth degree and others just get glossed over. People will not doubt laugh at me but I actually thought one of our better ball users today. That bad turnover on the wing was poor and was focussed on but he hit up targets inside 50 quite well a number of other times when nearly everyone else was just bombing to a Richmond filled pack.

Edit: Just went and checked and yes, Mitchell had the most goal assists and the most score involvements in confirmation of the above. Yet all we hear is what a liability he is with the ball.

 

[Hawkboy62]

Without getting in to a bun fight I'm wondering if anyone else is worried about our skill levels and aspects of the game plan, particularly our exit from defence?

Some random Hawk taking the kick-in and kicking it long to a contest has been as successful as Tom's helicopter kicks inside forward 50. Last year, early and late we were using foot speed and cooperative running fairly effectively at times, CJ and Impey early, Bramble et al late season. We were much more constrained for quality then but did well.

Our hand balling in general has not been up to scratch. If our players can hand ball longer, and more accurately, and even forward to a fellow Hawk at times we would look better. That's up to the coaches and the pre-season but it's been a fairly forlorn hope since the game was revolutionized in 2016. I expect that everyone can improve their hand balling technique , and we have a coach who was one of the best. Kicking is a different skill but surely a few players can practice kicking flatter and lower over summer, even at the expense of penetration. Not singling out Tom, JOM or the forgotten man Worpel but this would increase their effectiveness immensely, since they are some of our most prolific ball getters.

If we get rid of Tom, JOM, Impey and Wingard, which seems to be the general drift of many, it may be a forever rebuild as the young bodies can't be expected to play against men and succeed over a full season. Every other team is trying to improve too.

Anyway the real football is about to start next week. Hopefully our AFLW team can take less time than the Mayblooms to have some success.

 

[H00t]

Without getting in to a bun fight I'm wondering if anyone else is worried about our skill levels and aspects of the game plan, particularly our exit from defence?

Some random Hawk taking the kick-in and kicking it long to a contest has been as successful as Tom's helicopter kicks inside forward 50. Last year, early and late we were using foot speed and cooperative running fairly effectively at times, CJ and Impey early, Bramble et al late season. We were much more constrained for quality then but did well.

Our hand balling in general has not been up to scratch. If our players can hand ball longer, and more accurately, and even forward to a fellow Hawk at times we would look better. That's up to the coaches and the pre-season but it's been a fairly forlorn hope since the game was revolutionized in 2016. I expect that everyone can improve their hand balling technique , and we have a coach who was one of the best. Kicking is a different skill but surely a few players can practice kicking flatter and lower over summer, even at the expense of penetration. Not singling out Tom, JOM or the forgotten man Worpel but this would increase their effectiveness immensely, since they are some of our most prolific ball getters.

If we get rid of Tom, JOM, Impey and Wingard, which seems to be the general drift of many, it may be a forever rebuild as the young bodies can't be expected to play against men and succeed over a full season. Every other team is trying to improve too.

Anyway the real football is about to start next week. Hopefully our AFLW team can take less time than the Mayblooms to have some success.

Tigers where too quick for us around the ground. They shut down any options we tried to create which played a big part in our poor ball movement.

Even when we got long handball chains going up the ground we were only going deeper into trouble rather than out of it.

Can have the best kicks but when we don’t have the ability to provide options up the field they will have no one to kick it too.

It’s been a problem for a while. Something we were able to slightly rectify at the start of the year but as teams have adjusted to us they’ve shut it down.

 

[TylerDurden]

I noticed their smothering was unbelievable. We couldn't get a clear kick away in the first qtr.
Credit to the Tiges, they train the 1% like no other. Doesn't take experience or talent. Just 100% desire, and they have it in spades.

 

[Lickmesocks]

I noticed their smothering was unbelievable. We couldn't get a clear kick away in the first qtr.
Credit to the Tiges, they train the 1% like no other. Doesn't take experience or talent. Just 100% desire, and they have it in spades.

Ahhhh ladies and gents we have someone that watches the games closely.

Check out the basics the Tigers and Cats do by manning the mark especially rushing at the player about to take a hook kick from the boundary, smothering whenever they can, getting an arm in a contest they look done in and getting the ball over the line and back to a 50/50 contest.

These little differences make teams very strong and we have a lot to develop as a group.

Hopefully we get that hunger and desire back as a group under Sammy.

 

[badgrill]

Ahhhh ladies and gents we have someone that watches the games closely.

Check out the basics the Tigers and Cats do by manning the mark especially rushing at the player about to take a hook kick from the boundary, smothering whenever they can, getting an arm in a contest they look done in and getting the ball over the line and back to a 50/50 contest.

These little differences make teams very strong and we have a lot to develop as a group.

Hopefully we get that hunger and desire back as a group under Sammy.

yep, several semi-smothered handballs meant not only were we not able to break away after receiving, but a Tiger was usually able to mop up and give it their way before our players could stop and change direction, making us look even slower from the contest

 

[TylerDurden]

yep, several semi-smothered handballs meant not only were we not able to break away after receiving, but a Tiger was usually able to mop up and give it their way before our players could stop and change direction, making us look even slower from the contest

Spot on. Happened a lot.

 

[Hawthorn2023]

I don't want to get into an argument but your mind is made up, regardless of how Mitchell plays. Firstly, you are being misleading in highlighting the inside 50 count in the first qtr alone when (a) they only 3 had more inside 50's across the whole game, (b) most of their 'prolific' scoring was done after the first quarter, when Hawthorn won the inside 50 count, (c) at one point the graphic came up that Richmond had scored from 92% of their entries for the quarter (nearly all were goals too) which is almost unprecedentedly high and (d) Lynch was not marking quick, clean unstoppable entries on his chest - he was taking contested pack marks at the top of the goal square that really should have been brought to ground (notwithstanding that he was awesome and our backline is inexperienced).

That you somehow find a way to make this all Mitchell's fault is unfair in my view. Nearly everyone played poorly. Mitchell attended just 44% of Hawthorn's CBA's against Richmond (others in the 70's and 80's). Yet, he still won more of the ball than anyone else. He won the (equal) most contested ball of any Hawk. He still easily had the most effective disposals on the ground. He had the most score involvements. He had the equal most goal assists. His disposal efficiency was much higher than any other midfielder. His ball use going inside 50 was the best of any Hawk. Yes, he had a bad turnover that was focussed on but he put the ball on a platter plenty of other times (for Gunston, for Moore, etc) that was simply overlooked whilst others continually just blazed away aimlessly. In all honesty, if any other player on the ground (especially a younger player) had the game Mitchell had, everyone (including you) would be singing their praises. Tom Mitchell is not one of the many reasons we lost yesterday.

Firstly, is 21-6 inside 50 entries, a good result?

Secondly, who is accountable for this?

Finally, I'm tipping Cotchin & Prestia would have got some decent coaches votes. I'll be sure to keep a look out for your boy Tom in the votes.

 

[burner1]

While our attacking ball movement has improved this year it didn’t really stand up to Richmond’s pressure - there’s levels. The smothers and deflections on handballs just stifled us while they just waltzed through with with cleaner hands and speed.

Lots of work to do. Cohesion should improve but we were exposed for lack of speed/agility around the contest.

 

[Dewyyyyy]

Firstly, is 21-6 inside 50 entries, a good result?

Secondly, who is accountable for this?

Finally, I'm tipping Cotchin & Prestia would have got some decent coaches votes. I'll be sure to keep a look out for your boy Tom in the votes.

We got belted. No one will get a vote from us I’d suspect.

 

[Topiary]

Some here need to temper expectations. 17 years of “failure” between 91 and 08 and let me tell you there was some horrendous football that we had to endure in that time - some absolute smashings.

Doesn’t matter how many times a team plays finals - if you don’t win the GF nobody cares that you’ve played finals 17 seasons in a row, at the end of it, it’s just another let down.

Take a stroll to the Geelong board and see the impact of playing in so many finals and not getting the chocolates. They feel no different to the rest of us.

Going to need some patience - it’s going to be a journey

I wonder if the expectations are not met what it will mean for Sam.
I hope the Club maintains the course and nerve, as I am sure it will.

Games like yesterday remind you we have only just begun the List journey.
Repeat…..just begun it.

They take at least five years and that means everything goes right

I truly believe we now know what we need to do, but it is going to take considerable time for Hawthorn to again contend for premierships. Sound selections at all levels and development will deliver, some good luck thrown in and hopefully a flag in 27-28 is very possible.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Firstly, is 21-6 inside 50 entries, a good result?

Secondly, who is accountable for this?

Finally, I'm tipping Cotchin & Prestia would have got some decent coaches votes. I'll be sure to keep a look out for your boy Tom in the votes.

Are these genuine questions?

Of course 21-6 in a quarter is a poor result. Who is accountable? The whole team obviously - certainly not 1 player. Were inside 50s the reason we lost? Of course not, it was one of the few areas that was quite even over the course of the game.

As for coaches votes, I'm not sure of the relevance? It is unlikely any Hawthorn player earnt coaches votes. If they did a top 5 of Hawthorn players only, I'm confident Mitchell would be in there (also, he's not "my boy" I'm just highlighting that blaming Tom Mitchell as the main reason Lynch kicked 8 goals and we lost badly is ridiculous - especially when the inside 50's were nearly even and Richmond converted nearly all of them into scores).