Where does Hawkins rank

[geelong_crazy26]

Another chance in a GF would not hurt, He owns his game so much more now... For big man , a big player he still looks like he has a couple of years in him ..min.

the thing about his game is he has spent such a long time working on areas of his game that are not natural to him or any key forwards his mould or athletic traits that he has prolonged his career in the process.

the way he now works up and down the ground, gets into positions to deliver the ball when he is not within goal range to targets, his ground ball work and reading of the play.

he has gone from a stock standard gorilla key forward who has one trick to his bow to now being a player who can get involved in many different situations and links of play which has expanded his contribution to the team far beyond just scoring goals; but in the process of doing so has found more avenues to goal other than just wrestling an opponent.

His not going to necessarily lose his strength, he doesn’t rely on his penetrating kicking, and he doesn’t rely on pace.

his timing positioning and fitness have become huge assets of his game that may see his longevity in the game go until he is 34-36 years of age if he wants to keep going.

 

[dazbroncos]

I think Tomma is underated - and he gets clearly a rough pineapple fairly regularly due to his mass and strength.

IMO he crosses generation in his position. He could play the Dunstall leading up into space type forward but also the Lockett and Ablett fighting to hold space and taking the one on one grab as well.

Where he does not have the GAS factor is the screaming pack mark - but then again who really does at GFC these days.

Much like Domsy, Boris, Bartel, Tomma's actual value and appreciation wont be felt until he's gone.

I do hopewe can get another 3 years from him and that he gets the support from Freddy, Sav, Close, Rohan et al going forward to make it that far.

GO Catters

 

[bulletproof]

Not saying he has had a better career but Hawkins retiring is a bigger problem for Geelong than Selwood retiring. That is how good he is.

 

[Turbocat]

Not saying he has had a better career but Hawkins retiring is a bigger problem for Geelong than Selwood retiring. That is how good he is.

astute observation. I guess mids are alway easier to replace, easier to find a way to get game into probable replacements.

 

[Turbocat]

I think Tomma is underated - and he gets clearly a rough pineapple fairly regularly due to his mass and strength.

IMO he crosses generation in his position. He could play the Dunstall leading up into space type forward but also the Lockett and Ablett fighting to hold space and taking the one on one grab as well.

Where he does not have the GAS factor is the screaming pack mark - but then again who really does at GFC these days.

Much like Domsy, Boris, Bartel, Tomma's actual value and appreciation wont be felt until he's gone.

I do hopewe can get another 3 years from him and that he gets the support from Freddy, Sav, Close, Rohan et al going forward to make it that far.

GO Catters

Yep bent over, got hit in the head, and someone say he was staging... then they looked and said.. he put some sugar on it type comment. There has always been a preconception due to his size strength etc.

 

[Turbocat]

This probaby applies to more than just Hawkins.. in this era of a collapsing score number , team defence, slow transition, ball security etc its probably never been harder to gauge a FF value. Certainly we can not gauge by ablett/locket type goal numbers, I doubt they were eve asked to do what he has.

I wonder if we look at his contribution as a percentage of score, would have better numbers? Probably not.. the concept of spreading the goals have changed the game. Imagine if the changed the rules in Netball so that any player could score , the days a GS scoring <90% of the score would be done.

If not goals then role and longevity should not be under played. Many remember Colman played 98 games, very much a Howe type , 185cm so GAsr height 98 game and 537 goals is testament alone to how much he could dominate his era.

The player I'd like to see some vision of is Fred Fanning , a name hardly ever talked about yet ..... he hold the record for 18.1 in his final match , he kicked 411 goals in 104 games.. a name who came and went when Melb was a stronger club than now, a club. on the verge of huge era , yet now is hardly mentioned in the greats. Why did he stop after that game.. at 26 year old... its seem abherant now ..but it was diferent back then... Melb won a flag the next year in 47 .. it just wouldn't happen now.

I think longevity cant be under played in value. I doubt I have been able to butter up like GAjr for example 350 games, after achieving what he had , then once it started to get hard... why bother.. When as good as they are ..and then to do it and do it. How many can persist thru injury , yes they are well paid but to maintain a high level across a long period is admirable.

IF Hawk gets to 300 games he should rightly be sit alongside Wade and Ablett ..even though his goals will be a lot less. He CV would look so much better with another big finals series, perhaps a GF. He is not alone on that. Dangerfield would be desperate id think to play on thatday at least once

If Tom can unplug his mental microwave, avoid having a brain melt , and we continue with good form then there is hope he has a chance to once again show that nothing is as mighty as a big man ripping a game apart in a big final.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

This probaby applies to more than just Hawkins.. in this era of a collapsing score number , team defence, slow transition, ball security etc its probably never been harder to gauge a FF value. Certainly we can not gauge by ablett/locket type goal numbers, I doubt they were eve asked to do what he has.

I wonder if we look at his contribution as a percentage of score, would have better numbers? Probably not.. the concept of spreading the goals have changed the game. Imagine if the changed the rules in Netball so that any player could score , the days a GS scoring <90% of the score would be done.

If not goals then role and longevity should not be under played. Many remember Colman played 98 games, very much a Howe type , 185cm so GAsr height 98 game and 537 goals is testament alone to how much he could dominate his era.

The player I'd like to see some vision of is Fred Fanning , a name hardly ever talked about yet ..... he hold the record for 18.1 in his final match , he kicked 411 goals in 104 games.. a name who came and went when Melb was a stronger club than now, a club. on the verge of huge era , yet now is hardly mentioned in the greats. Why did he stop after that game.. at 26 year old... its seem abherant now ..but it was diferent back then... Melb won a flag the next year in 47 .. it just wouldn't happen now.

I think longevity cant be under played in value. I doubt I have been able to butter up like GAjr for example 350 games, after achieving what he had , then once it started to get hard... why bother.. When as good as they are ..and then to do it and do it. How many can persist thru injury , yes they are well paid but to maintain a high level across a long period is admirable.

IF Hawk gets to 300 games he should rightly be sit alongside Wade and Ablett ..even though his goals will be a lot less. He CV would look so much better with another big finals series, perhaps a GF. He is not alone on that. Dangerfield would be desperate id think to play on thatday at least once

If Tom can unplug his mental microwave, avoid having a brain melt , and we continue with good form then there is hope he has a chance to once again show that nothing is as mighty as a big man ripping a game apart in a big final.

in addition to that is it fair to analyse hawkins based off goal numbers?? For me he has played as much a CHF role as a full forward role over the years. He is a modern day key forward hybrid that covers anywhere between The goal square to the Centre square. He is not just an inside forward fifty target. Would say players like Jack riewoldt and Kennedy are much more traditional stay at home forwards than Tom is.

 

[PhatBoy]

in addition to that is it fair to analyse hawkins based off goal numbers?? For me he has played as much a CHF role as a full forward role over the years. He is a modern day key forward hybrid that covers anywhere between The goal square to the Centre square. He is not just an inside forward fifty target. Would say players like Jack riewoldt and Kennedy are much more traditional stay at home forwards than Tom is.

Completely agree with this. CHF is his job description.

 

[Cursed Cat]

This probaby applies to more than just Hawkins.. in this era of a collapsing score number , team defence, slow transition, ball security etc its probably never been harder to gauge a FF value. Certainly we can not gauge by ablett/locket type goal numbers, I doubt they were eve asked to do what he has.

I wonder if we look at his contribution as a percentage of score, would have better numbers? Probably not.. the concept of spreading the goals have changed the game. Imagine if the changed the rules in Netball so that any player could score , the days a GS scoring <90% of the score would be done.

If not goals then role and longevity should not be under played. Many remember Colman played 98 games, very much a Howe type , 185cm so GAsr height 98 game and 537 goals is testament alone to how much he could dominate his era.

The player I'd like to see some vision of is Fred Fanning , a name hardly ever talked about yet ..... he hold the record for 18.1 in his final match , he kicked 411 goals in 104 games.. a name who came and went when Melb was a stronger club than now, a club. on the verge of huge era , yet now is hardly mentioned in the greats. Why did he stop after that game.. at 26 year old... its seem abherant now ..but it was diferent back then... Melb won a flag the next year in 47 .. it just wouldn't happen now.

I think longevity cant be under played in value. I doubt I have been able to butter up like GAjr for example 350 games, after achieving what he had , then once it started to get hard... why bother.. When as good as they are ..and then to do it and do it. How many can persist thru injury , yes they are well paid but to maintain a high level across a long period is admirable.

IF Hawk gets to 300 games he should rightly be sit alongside Wade and Ablett ..even though his goals will be a lot less. He CV would look so much better with another big finals series, perhaps a GF. He is not alone on that. Dangerfield would be desperate id think to play on thatday at least once

If Tom can unplug his mental microwave, avoid having a brain melt , and we continue with good form then there is hope he has a chance to once again show that nothing is as mighty as a big man ripping a game apart in a big final.

I suspected like a lot of players back then that Fanning wanted some reward for his talents and wasn't getting it in the VFL - look at some of Geelong's 51-52 flag winning side; quite a few sought greener ($$) pastures despite onfield success ... had a quick squizz on the always excellent Australian Football site, and sure enough:

" the following year he accepted the post of playing-coach at Victorian country team Hamilton, which had offered him nearly three times as much money per match as he was getting in the VFL. Thus, at the age of just twenty-five, his league football career was over¹. "

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Completely agree with this. CHF is his job description.

he is the definition for mine of the modern day CHF role that mixes playing deep forward with mobility up the ground

 

[My Tilly]

Would say players like Jack riewoldt and Kennedy are much more traditional stay at home forwards than Tom is.

Same as Hawkins.
He rarely ventures outside forward fifty. He did when he was younger but he's as close to a traditional full forward as you can possibly get.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Same as Hawkins.
He rarely ventures outside forward fifty. He did when he was younger but he's as close to a traditional full forward as you can possibly get.

Lol hawkins plays a hybrid role of CHF/FF. He is not as close to a traditional full forward as you can get. Just not correct at all

 

[My Tilly]

Lol hawkins plays a hybrid role of CHF/FF. He is not as close to a traditional full forward as you can get. Just not correct at all

Hybrid role?
He leads all key forwards for marks inside 50, hardball gets inside forward fifty and is averaging 1.7 inside forward fifties per game. Less than Riewoldt who you believe is a stay at home forward.

 

[Turbocat]

I suspected like a lot of players back then that Fanning wanted some reward for his talents and wasn't getting it in the VFL - look at some of Geelong's 51-52 flag winning side; quite a few sought greener ($$) pastures despite onfield success ... had a quick squizz on the always excellent Australian Football site, and sure enough:

" the following year he accepted the post of playing-coach at Victorian country team Hamilton, which had offered him nearly three times as much money per match as he was getting in the VFL. Thus, at the age of just twenty-five, his league football career was over¹. "

Yes lots did it ... I had wondered if it was that or perhaps injury, like Coleman. and like Tom's father Jack ... I think both may have been fixed these days and been able to play on..

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Hybrid role?
He leads all key forwards for marks inside 50, hardball gets inside forward fifty and is averaging 1.7 inside forward fifties per game. Less than Riewoldt who you believe is a stay at home forward.

he also lead the AFL for goal assists I believe last year in H/A, do you honestly think a traditional stay at home key forward would lead the AFL for goal assists?? Lol. He is probably more a CHF than a full forward if I had to pick, but his a modern day hybrid of the two.

 

[PhatBoy]

Same as Hawkins.
He rarely ventures outside forward fifty. He did when he was younger but he's as close to a traditional full forward as you can possibly get.

Have you actually been watching him? Amazing that for a forward who rarely ventures outside his forward 50 that in the last 2 and a half seasons he has taken 176 marks inside 50..... and 153 outside 50. Compared to say, Kennedy - who in that time has taken 132 marks inside 50, and 62 outside 50 (68 per cent inside 50). Or, say, jack Riewoldt who has taken 150 inside 50, and 91 outside (63 per cent inside). Or Ben Brown - 132 in, 102 out (57 per cent inside 50).

His ratio actually hasn't changed much at all over his entire career. When he first became a first-choice permanent forward his proportion of marks inside 50 was about 48.5 per cent, now it's 'ballooned' to 53.

Lance Franklin - though not a CHF, who is renowned for how far he pushes up the ground, only takes 52 per cent of his marks in the last 3 seasons beyond the arc and 48 per cent inside 50.

Even Jack Darling - who as one of the few key forwards in the competition who has a legitimately good Full Forward in his team, has more of a roaming commission to go further upfield, takes 44 per cent of his marks inside the forward 50.

As the lone tall forward most of the time, Hawkins clearly gets the ball upfield a LOT, for a player who supposedly is as close to a traditional full foward as you can get

 

[Warhorse]

Never reached his potential. He was a freak athletically but injuries put a stop to that. Cleared 2 meters in the high jump as a junior, thats insane. Was a high flying pack marker as a junior despite being a gorilla in size.

He had to change his game as his body wouldnt allow him the way to play the way he did as a junior. He is a very clever footballer.

Even when he is having a bad night he is constantly creating space for others with his leading patterns. Can no longer really take a pack mark but has genuine forward craft. Probably the most of any tall in the game

 

[Spearman]

Have you actually been watching him? Amazing that for a forward who rarely ventures outside his forward 50 that in the last 2 and a half seasons he has taken 176 marks inside 50..... and 153 outside 50. Compared to say, Kennedy - who in that time has taken 132 marks inside 50, and 62 outside 50 (68 per cent inside 50). Or, say, jack Riewoldt who has taken 150 inside 50, and 91 outside (63 per cent inside). Or Ben Brown - 132 in, 102 out (57 per cent inside 50).

His ratio actually hasn't changed much at all over his entire career. When he first became a first-choice permanent forward his proportion of marks inside 50 was about 48.5 per cent, now it's 'ballooned' to 53.

Lance Franklin - though not a CHF, who is renowned for how far he pushes up the ground, only takes 52 per cent of his marks in the last 3 seasons beyond the arc and 48 per cent inside 50.

Even Jack Darling - who as one of the few key forwards in the competition who has a legitimately good Full Forward in his team, has more of a roaming commission to go further upfield, takes 44 per cent of his marks inside the forward 50.

As the lone tall forward most of the time, Hawkins clearly gets the ball upfield a LOT, for a player who supposedly is as close to a traditional full foward as you can get

my impression of TH is that he is one of our best field kicks entering the F50.

 

[PhatBoy]

my impression of TH is that he is one of our best field kicks entering the F50.

thats not an impression mate. That’s a fact. Outside of probably Duncan or Ablett he’s the best kick we have going forward.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Hawk>Pav

But Fev was better. Shame how he made his own career self-destruct.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

One good thing about Hawkins - or maybe one good thing about the rule change re the nominated ruckman

When there is a boundary throw in within say 20-25 metres of Geelongs goal - Hawkins is very dangerous ( and unique ) in that with brute strength - he can legally get rid of the opposition ruckman

Previously - prior to the rule change ( and im not into that one eyed bulldust - eg Tom or Geel get a goodrun/bad run from the umpires ) is that if Hawkins took the ruck throwin - and he out maneured the oppo ruckman ( exactly like he is doing now ) then 50% of the time the umpire would pay a free kick against him - it was like the umpire saying - Tom you are a FF - and you are up against a genuine ruckman - and im not letting you do that - which use to infuriate me

 

[PhatBoy]

One good thing about Hawkins - or maybe one good thing about the rule change re the nominated ruckman

When there is a boundary throw in within say 20-25 metres of Geelongs goal - Hawkins is very dangerous ( and unique ) in that with brute strength - he can legally get rid of the opposition ruckman

Previously - prior to the rule change ( and im not into that one eyed bulldust - eg Tom or Geel get a goodrun/bad run from the umpires ) is that if Hawkins took the ruck throwin - and he out maneured the oppo ruckman ( exactly like he is doing now ) then 50% of the time the umpire would pay a free kick against him - it was like the umpire saying - Tom you are a FF - and you are up against a genuine ruckman - and im not letting you do that - which use to infuriate me

YES!!!! This. Know exactly what you mean. He is very very dangerous in that scenario and I have a feeling that while opposition coaches will start to work specifically on a counter to it, Scott should be priming the likes of Rohan or Miers or even Danger to run off him every time in that scenario as he seems to frequently take clean possession

 

[kickazz]

thats not an impression mate. That’s a fact. Outside of probably Duncan or Ablett he’s the best kick we have going forward.

He reminds me of Wayne Carey in that sense - he's not so much a bullet pass on the chest kind of kick, but he can assess the contest and space and always puts the ball to the teammate's advantage.

 

[Xcat]

I feel like hawk is one of the best snaps on goal in the league for many years..almost a lock when he gets a chance.

 

[My Tilly]

He is probably more a CHF than a full forward

Amazing.