Analysis Speculation best team in 2016: List & depth analysis

Remove this Banner Ad

I had insomnia last night and finally managed to watch our final against Hawthorn again.
While we easily had as much of the ball and dominated possession for long periods we were constantly let down by poor kicking, all over the ground but particularly into the forwards.
DeBoer is a good example, played a pretty decent game, won plenty of hard ball and proceeded to kick it over the forwards heads or to nowhere in particular. Mzungu was desperate and brilliant in patches but sprayed it everywhere. Dawson was horrible by hand or foot.
Dan Pearce wasn't terrible but rarely had a kick without being under pressure, same for Hill except when he was in the back half. Hawthorn made sure our best kicks couldn't get on the end of it near goal.
Hawthorns kicking was almost without exception excellent or at least good. Many years ago they got rid of Dawson because he didn't fit with Clarkson's policy of only having above average kicks.
The results of their selection policy are in.
Bottom line. We need more skilful players in the team which is not news to anyone. I honestly think the couple of ordinary drafts we had put a real hole in our list in the younger ages. Sheridan is at best average and Crozier can't get a regular game 5 years in so we continue to rely on foot soldiers .
I think the last couple of drafts have us back in the right area but we need time for those players to come through and quite a few are going to drop off the other end in the meantime.
 
E Shed said:
I had insomnia last night and finally managed to watch our final against Hawthorn again.
While we easily had as much of the ball and dominated possession for long periods we were constantly let down by poor kicking, all over the ground but particularly into the forwards.
DeBoer is a good example, played a pretty decent game, won plenty of hard ball and proceeded to kick it over the forwards heads or to nowhere in particular. Mzungu was desperate and brilliant in patches but sprayed it everywhere. Dawson was horrible by hand or foot.
Dan Pearce wasn't terrible but rarely had a kick without being under pressure, same for Hill except when he was in the back half. Hawthorn made sure our best kicks couldn't get on the end of it near goal.
Hawthorns kicking was almost without exception excellent or at least good. Many years ago they got rid of Dawson because he didn't fit with Clarkson's policy of only having above average kicks.
The results of their selection policy are in.
Bottom line. We need more skilful players in the team which is not news to anyone. I honestly think the couple of ordinary drafts we had put a real hole in our list in the younger ages. Sheridan is at best average and Crozier can't get a regular game 5 years in so we continue to rely on foot soldiers .
I think the last couple of drafts have us back in the right area but we need time for those players to come through and quite a few are going to drop off the other end in the meantime.
Click to expand...
Spots on :thumbsu:, short term pain vs long term gain.
 
E Shed said:
I had insomnia last night and finally managed to watch our final against Hawthorn again.
While we easily had as much of the ball and dominated possession for long periods we were constantly let down by poor kicking, all over the ground but particularly into the forwards.
DeBoer is a good example, played a pretty decent game, won plenty of hard ball and proceeded to kick it over the forwards heads or to nowhere in particular. Mzungu was desperate and brilliant in patches but sprayed it everywhere. Dawson was horrible by hand or foot.
Dan Pearce wasn't terrible but rarely had a kick without being under pressure, same for Hill except when he was in the back half. Hawthorn made sure our best kicks couldn't get on the end of it near goal.
Hawthorns kicking was almost without exception excellent or at least good. Many years ago they got rid of Dawson because he didn't fit with Clarkson's policy of only having above average kicks.
The results of their selection policy are in.
Bottom line. We need more skilful players in the team which is not news to anyone. I honestly think the couple of ordinary drafts we had put a real hole in our list in the younger ages. Sheridan is at best average and Crozier can't get a regular game 5 years in so we continue to rely on foot soldiers .
I think the last couple of drafts have us back in the right area but we need time for those players to come through and quite a few are going to drop off the other end in the meantime.
Click to expand...

Yes I went through articles on other clubs draft picks this year, Hawks described as taking 3 footballers not athletes or marathon runners. Really like hearing what David hale is doing at training with the rucks and forwards. There is a change and we've been very close so just might make the difference.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

E Shed said:
Given Lyon's preference for the known he will no doubt start round 1 as will the rest of the players I think of as blunt objects - Suban, Mayne, DeBoer but the kids are coming and Bennell puts real pressure on.
Click to expand...

And on this Sunday morning, this is the Gospel according to the Book of Peabody.

The seasoned players know the ins and outs of the game plan, are fighting fit from several pre-seasons and have loads of experience under their belts but surely we can only at best expect a modicum of improvement from them.

Meaningful improvement for 2016 hangs upon the 'unknown' at this point at least and whether the likes of Weller, Blakely, Langdon, Crozier, Gray, Taberner, Apeness etc can push up to make their selection compelling on the back of strong preseason form and fitness. If it is deemed that they are not ready (like some would suggest that Fyfe is not 'ready' to be Captain) it is more than likely that we will revert to the tried and tested again as there are too many careers and commercial realities at stake to play the kids regardless. While ever there is a perception that we can win games and contend better with the seasoned players, they will be selected even though the evidence of the last few years has proven otherwise.

I do hope that the planets line up and enough of the younger group push up on merit. But if confronted with a choice of promoting them ahead of time or reverting to the same old in the pursuit of 'sustained success', I don't think the Club has the gumption. I love where the current regime has taken us but perhaps we've gone a little too far and we're a little too risk averse, formulaic and unwilling to exercise instinct.

I understand that it might be a little controversial to draw from someone like John Worsfold, but I tend to agree with his recent sentiment that it is pointless to pursue a top four spot if you're not good enough to take out the whole shooting match. I think this is where we are now at with the group of 2012 to 2015 - we peaked in 2013 during that Sydney prelim to be specific. I don't see us getting any better in 2016 if many of the the likes of Suban, D.Pearce, C.Pearce, Deboer, Mayne, Mzungu and a double teamed Pav remain part of the mainstay.
 
Mr Peabody said:
And on this Sunday morning, this is the Gospel according to the Book of Peabody.

The seasoned players know the ins and outs of the game plan, are fighting fit from several pre-seasons and have loads of experience under their belts but surely we can only at best expect a modicum of improvement from them.

Meaningful improvement for 2016 hangs upon the 'unknown' at this point at least and whether the likes of Weller, Blakely, Langdon, Crozier, Gray, Taberner, Apeness etc can push up to make their selection compelling on the back of strong preseason form and fitness. If it is deemed that they are not ready (like some would suggest that Fyfe is not 'ready' to be Captain) it is more than likely that we will revert to the tried and tested again as there are too many careers and commercial realities at stake to play the kids regardless. While ever there is a perception that we can win games and contend better with the seasoned players, they will be selected even though the evidence of the last few years has proven otherwise.

I do hope that the planets line up and enough of the younger group push up on merit. But if confronted with a choice of promoting them ahead of time or reverting to the same old in the pursuit of 'sustained success', I don't think the Club has the gumption. I love where the current regime has taken us but perhaps we've gone a little too far and we're a little too risk averse, formulaic and unwilling to exercise instinct.

I understand that it might be a little controversial to draw from someone like John Worsfold, but I tend to agree with his recent sentiment that it is pointless to pursue a top four spot if you're not good enough to take out the whole shooting match. I think this is where we are now at with the group of 2012 to 2015 - we peaked in 2013 during that Sydney prelim to be specific. I don't see us getting any better in 2016 if many of the the likes of Suban, D.Pearce, C.Pearce, Deboer, Mayne, Mzungu and a double teamed Pav remain part of the mainstay.
Click to expand...
I agree with a lot of what you say, however I think the thing we have to take a risk with is gameplan and style. A change in gameplan may see the youngsters with more to offer, alternatively it may see some of the lower end players that you have mentioned prove that they have more in their kitbag. Chris Mayne is a case in point. He apparently performed well enough to be voted by the coaches as the 9th best player in 2015. He is a forward and we cannot score. Surely this suggests he is being measured on the wrong things, things that don't help us to score enough. While the coaches are happy with his output we cannot criticise him for his performance. We need to look to the coaches to make the changes we need.
 
I think players like Weller and co have the capacity to contribute but will struggle across a full season. Players such as de Boer and Co will contribute across a full season but their skill set is not as high as the current best opposition has shown we need to defeat them come finals.

We are in transition and I am interested to see how the club manages that.
 
dockerfemme said:
I agree with a lot of what you say, however I think the thing we have to take a risk with is gameplan and style. A change in gameplan may see the youngsters with more to offer, alternatively it may see some of the lower end players that you have mentioned prove that they have more in their kitbag. Chris Mayne is a case in point. He apparently performed well enough to be voted by the coaches as the 9th best player in 2015. He is a forward and we cannot score. Surely this suggests he is being measured on the wrong things, things that don't help us to score enough. While the coaches are happy with his output we cannot criticise him for his performance. We need to look to the coaches to make the changes we need.
Click to expand...
100% dockerfemme.

It is fine having players who are experienced and know the game plan in and out, but if the game plan is not going to win us a flag then it is no real advantage. When Ross first arrived it took him half a season to get the guys playing to his plan, and from there on we have been very successful - right up until it counts.

I think the Eagles found the same thing with Simpson's plan this year. It got them to a grand final, but was nowhere near good enough to win it - I think they have openly acknowledged they will have to adjust their plan next year.

I hope Ross has the same willingness to acknowledge the need to change.
 
E Shed said:
Hawthorns kicking was almost without exception excellent or at least good. Many years ago they got rid of Dawson because he didn't fit with Clarkson's policy of only having above average kicks.
Click to expand...

Wow so Clarkson delisted Dawson specifically because of his kicking? I wonder how that turnover merchant in his early years Ryan Schoenmakers managed to stay on the list then.

And isn't it odd how Dawson (not Fyfe, not Barlow) was the first player mentioned by Clarkson when analyzing the importance of the players we missed when we lost to Hawthorn in the "GF Rematch' in Round 3 2014:

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-04-04/postmatch-hawks (at 04:28)

"Zac Dawson has been a really really underrated performer for them for a long period of time, including his time at St Kilda. He's developed into a really really good defender."
Click to expand...
Far from vindicating Hawthorn's decision to delist Dawson "because he didn't fit with Clarkson's policy of only having above average kicks", I read that acknowledgement to the footy world by a 2 time premiership winning coach (as he then was) of Dawson's worth as a public apology for mistreating a young player who clearly had it in him to be a good full back and did not deserve to be thrown to the wolves when he wasn't ready then delisted.

In my view the one glaring deficiency in our backline in the GF was the absence of Ibbotson. Without him we were terribly undermanned and incapable of controlling Gunston.
 
Last edited:
E Shed said:
I had insomnia last night and finally managed to watch our final against Hawthorn again.
While we easily had as much of the ball and dominated possession for long periods we were constantly let down by poor kicking, all over the ground but particularly into the forwards.
DeBoer is a good example, played a pretty decent game, won plenty of hard ball and proceeded to kick it over the forwards heads or to nowhere in particular. Mzungu was desperate and brilliant in patches but sprayed it everywhere. Dawson was horrible by hand or foot.
Dan Pearce wasn't terrible but rarely had a kick without being under pressure, same for Hill except when he was in the back half. Hawthorn made sure our best kicks couldn't get on the end of it near goal.
Hawthorns kicking was almost without exception excellent or at least good. Many years ago they got rid of Dawson because he didn't fit with Clarkson's policy of only having above average kicks.
The results of their selection policy are in.
Bottom line. We need more skilful players in the team which is not news to anyone. I honestly think the couple of ordinary drafts we had put a real hole in our list in the younger ages. Sheridan is at best average and Crozier can't get a regular game 5 years in so we continue to rely on foot soldiers .
I think the last couple of drafts have us back in the right area but we need time for those players to come through and quite a few are going to drop off the other end in the meantime.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how hard working a player is, turning over the ball is a killer. Takes less effort when you hit targets than turning over the ball and defending.

For me, bring in the likes of Tucker and Weller to replace De Boer, Mzunga, Suban, Sheridan, Sutcliffe.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Crippa said:
McPharlin chalk (0 flag)
Schoenmakers cheese (1 flag)
Click to expand...

Dawson chalk (0 flag 3 grand final try)
Mcparlin ( less cheese 0 flag 1 grand final try)
Schoenmakers ( cheese 1 flag 2 grand final try)
 
E Shed said:
Bottom line. We need more skilful players in the team which is not news to anyone. I honestly think the couple of ordinary drafts we had put a real hole in our list in the younger ages. Sheridan is at best average and Crozier can't get a regular game 5 years in so we continue to rely on foot soldiers .
I think the last couple of drafts have us back in the right area but we need time for those players to come through and quite a few are going to drop off the other end in the meantime.
Click to expand...

While I agree that our last 2 drafts have added high quality to the mid stocks, the one slightly lngging doubt about 2015 is that a player like Balic was a highly regarded, high possession "footballer" but with a slight question mark over his kick/disposal efficieny. Presumably this was the reason for the slide. Despite this, I feel confident we may have a real steal here.
 
E Shed said:
I had insomnia last night and finally managed to watch our final against Hawthorn again.
While we easily had as much of the ball and dominated possession for long periods we were constantly let down by poor kicking, all over the ground but particularly into the forwards.
DeBoer is a good example, played a pretty decent game, won plenty of hard ball and proceeded to kick it over the forwards heads or to nowhere in particular. Mzungu was desperate and brilliant in patches but sprayed it everywhere. Dawson was horrible by hand or foot.
Dan Pearce wasn't terrible but rarely had a kick without being under pressure, same for Hill except when he was in the back half. Hawthorn made sure our best kicks couldn't get on the end of it near goal.
Hawthorns kicking was almost without exception excellent or at least good. Many years ago they got rid of Dawson because he didn't fit with Clarkson's policy of only having above average kicks.
The results of their selection policy are in.
Bottom line. We need more skilful players in the team which is not news to anyone. I honestly think the couple of ordinary drafts we had put a real hole in our list in the younger ages. Sheridan is at best average and Crozier can't get a regular game 5 years in so we continue to rely on foot soldiers .
I think the last couple of drafts have us back in the right area but we need time for those players to come through and quite a few are going to drop off the other end in the meantime.
Click to expand...

The good news is think we have plenty of class coming through. I dont subscribe to the point that we have had a couple of bad drafts and there is a hole in our list. The only bad draft we had was the Simpson/Duffy draft in recent years. I rate Crozier and Sheridan significantly higher than you do, but even if you dont rate them I love the fact we have Tucker,, Balic, Langdon and Weller coming through to add class to the team in future years. IMO in the last two drafts we have recruited bloody well and that will hold us brilliantly for the next couple of years. We also have enough midfield depth to throw the kitchen sink at McCarthy next year.
I think how well we are set up for the future is demonstrated by what our best 22 would look like in three to four years time. Ive included Hurley (because I think he will be a significant player in the future) and Mora. (crossing fingers)
My best 22 doesnt include Hogan, because clearly we would have to trade a heap to get him, but even without Hogan our best 22 in three to four years time with no additions other than McCarthy would look something like this:

B: Hughes Collins Tucker
HB: Mora A.Pearce Sheridan
C: Hill Blakely Weller
R: Clarke Neale Fyfe
HF: Bennell Tabs Balic
FF: Hurley McCarthy Walters

I?C Crozier, Sutty, Langdon, Apeness

I really like the class in the team and definitely think we are well set for the next few years.
 
Crippa said:
Wow so Clarkson delisted Dawson specifically because of his kicking? I wonder how that turnover merchant in his early years Ryan Schoenmakers managed to stay on the list then.

And isn't it odd how Dawson (not Fyfe, not Barlow) was the first player mentioned by Clarkson when analyzing the importance of the players we missed when we lost to Hawthorn in the "GF Rematch' in Round 3 2014:


Far from vindicating Hawthorn's decision to delist Dawson "because he didn't fit with Clarkson's policy of only having above average kicks", I read that acknowledgement to the footy world by a 2 time premiership winning coach (as he then was) of Dawson's worth as a public apology for mistreating a young player who clearly had it in him to be a good full back and did not deserve to be thrown to the wolves when he wasn't ready then delisted.

In my view the one glaring deficiency in our backline in the GF was the absence of Ibbotson. Without him we were terribly undermanned and incapable of controlling Gunston.
Click to expand...
I very much rate Dawson as a negating full back. He is one of the best in the business. I was simply making the point that in my opinion the main difference between our sides in the last final was the kicking skills of the Hawks and that that is a direct consequence of their recruiting policy and we needs more skilled players in the side.
Shoenmakers is a rare exception in the Hawks side and consequently it took him a long time and some injuries to get into that team and when he did its as a forward. They don't play anyone in the back half that can't kick it long and accurately. Shoenmakers is a pretty good kick for goal too.
 
sherrif said:
I dont subscribe to the point that we have had a couple of bad drafts and there is a hole in our list. The only bad draft we had was the Simpson/Duffy draft in recent years.
Click to expand...
Nah we had 2010 where we took Pittt, Michie and a few others. That is they year where we should have players well established in the team but we got nada. Utterly zip when there were players like Darling and Fasolo available at our picks. Both strong forwards and long accurate kicks. Of course Pitt should in his prime now and would have made a fabulous distributor off half back.
 
E Shed said:
I very much rate Dawson as a negating full back. He is one of the best in the business. I was simply making the point that in my opinion the main difference between our sides in the last final was the kicking skills of the Hawks and that that is a direct consequence of their recruiting policy and we needs more skilled players in the side.
Click to expand...

We are in furious agreement on all those points.

E Shed said:
Shoenmakers is a rare exception in the Hawks side and consequently it took him a long time and some injuries to get into that team.
Click to expand...

But it didn't take him a long time at all. Schoenmakers got into the team in his first year. Played about 13 games a year between 2009-2011 then 25 games as their designated full back in 2012. This despite being a notorious turnover merchant from day 1. Schoenmakers only stopped being in the side in his 5th year when he did his ACL - when Hawthorn were lucky enough to be able to get old man Lake to move next door. If not for that fortuitous turn of events, Schoenmakers would have continued turning the ball over from full back in 2013-2015 as there were no other players they'd developed for that position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tonga Bob
Analysis Best Traded Team vs Best Drafted Team
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
Piggy Smalls
Piggy Smalls
King Huskii
2023 and onwards/depth and draft strength
2 3
Replies
61
Views
5K
theGav56
T
go_the_dockers
  • Poll
List Mgmt. 2024 List Management thread - Trade Targets
180 181 182 183 184
Replies
5K
Views
228K
FreoRicci
FreoRicci
J
  • Poll
Prediction Which 2023 new player will have the best career
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
FreoGirl
FreoGirl
Spirit Level
Preview 2024 Best 22 Discussion
29 30 31 32 33
Replies
805
Views
56K
apuchar
apuchar
MrDanggazz
Prediction 2023 Best 22 Teams and discussion
51 52 53 54 55
Replies
1K
Views
87K
SupermanCapes
SupermanCapes
Lore
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2023 List Management thread - Pt2 Now With Added Wailing & Gnashing of Teeth
304 305 306 307 308
Replies
8K
Views
312K
Snuffaluphagus
Snuffaluphagus

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top