Deal to get Charman

[Dan Warna]

hawthorn have staged a remarkable comeback in the abscense of spoida.

i.

How about more that:
1/That their young players have been DEVELOPED and are coming of age
2/ that when they have traded...that they have done so to advantage...rather than toa net disadvantage.
3/that they have mined the rookie system very well.


Hawthorns success is due to smart recruitment and player development....and not beacuse Spiad swapped clubs.

Hawthorn has rebuilt through youth. The timing of Spider leaving is co-incidental. It's not especially due to smarts or development, it's due to perseverance, working to a plan, and accepting the pain it takes to get there... and having the guts a few years ago to decide it's what was necessary. They've brought trough some very good players, they've also had their share of busts.

exactly Bam

having a relatively injury free time didnt' hurt either.

pretty much only vandenberg and williams have been out and frankly hawthorn are not light in the forward line.

their biggest issue is if yhou can beat their midfield their defence leaks like a seive.

[maverick]

1/ I think you are only looking at where a ruckman really crucified us.....rather than looking at how a good to elite ruckman could have provided some extra advantage in virtually every game.

How many elite ruckman are there in the game?

Infact, how many elite ruckmen have their been in the history of the game?


An elite player in any position will provide extra advantage in a game.

How many premiership ruckmen have been elite?

Ball and Jolly? No way.
Cox? Yes.
Keating, Charman and MacDonald? Not even close.
Brogan? No.
Lade? Close.
John Barnes and Alessio? Pfft.
Capuano and McKernan? McKernan at the time, yes.

Of course you'd love to have an elite ruckman - the same as every club wants an elite forward, FB or on-baller, but the way people talk is that we've erred in the fact that we don't have one.

As usual SR, you're full of it.

You've made so many grand calls over the last year and this pre-season, and now that they're all falling to pieces and being revealed as garbage - you're clutching.

I don't think you even know what you're arguing about anymore.

I'd be happy with an average or above average one, at the moment we have far worse than that.

[saintsRrising]

danny jacobs was a trade that doesn't seem to have worked out (pick 4 right?)

Err...Dan...I am obviously ONLY talking about what has occurred since the new broom has came in......and NOT the philophosy that was used prior to that. at the Hawks....

[saintsRrising]

1/ I think you are only looking at where a ruckman really crucified us.....rather than looking at how a good to elite ruckman could have provided some extra advantage in virtually every game.

How many elite ruckman are there in the game?

Infact, how many elite ruckmen have their been in the history of the game?


.

I know that understanding is not your stong point Rodger...BUT read the sentence AGAIN..

I said "good to elite".

There are ample good to elite ruckman about.....

Rodger how about discussing what I have ACTUALLY posted rather than your DELIBERATE distortion of what I have posted.


How many Premiership ruckman have been good to elite? Answer = most Rodger = MOST.

[Dan Warna]

danny jacobs was a trade that doesn't seem to have worked out (pick 4 right?)

Err...Dan...I am obviously ONLY talking about what has occurred since the new broom has came in......and NOT the philophosy that was used prior to that. at the Hawks....

happy to be corrected but wasn't the jacobs for picks the one under clarkeson?

also WCE traded for chick stenglein and others, sydney have also traded picks for players.

[Riewoldting]

BUT read the sentence AGAIN..

I said "good to elite".

There are ample good to elite ruckman about.....

He's got you there Dodger

[saintsRrising]

hawthorn have staged a remarkable comeback in the abscense of spoida.

i.

How about more that:
1/That their young players have been DEVELOPED and are coming of age
2/ that when they have traded...that they have done so to advantage...rather than toa net disadvantage.
3/that they have mined the rookie system very well.


Hawthorns success is due to smart recruitment and player development....and not beacuse Spiad swapped clubs.

Hawthorn has rebuilt through youth. The timing of Spider leaving is co-incidental. It's not especially due to smarts or development, it's due to perseverance, working to a plan, and accepting the pain it takes to get there... and having the guts a few years ago to decide it's what was necessary. They've brought trough some very good players, they've also had their share of busts.

Agreed as posted Spida leaving had nothing to do with it..


And yes the Hawthorn strategy is smart to me.....

Just because it is simple or not complicated it does not mean that it is not smart....


There is no problems with BUSTs...as you cannot get every player right...and no club will.

You get in front however when you have a good return from your trade/draft cost.

With the new broom brought in from Port adelaide the Hawks have traded very well...to get better value than they should have from the players that departed.


With the new Port Adelaide Broom in place (coaching and the behind the scenes PA recruiting guy) the Hawks have don very weel with their youth policy.


now the Hawks are very young...and are not there yet.....but they are on the right path.


We wre on the same path, but faltered and hada burst of trading for GOP players REJECTED by their clubs.

[rodgerfox]

1/ I think you are only looking at where a ruckman really crucified us.....rather than looking at how a good to elite ruckman could have provided some extra advantage in virtually every game.

How many elite ruckman are there in the game?

Infact, how many elite ruckmen have their been in the history of the game?


.

I know that understanding is not your stong point Rodger...BUT read the sentence AGAIN..

I said "good to elite".

There are ample good to elite ruckman about.....

Rodger how about discussing what I have ACTUALLY posted rather than your DELIBERATE distortion of what I have posted.


How many Premiership ruckman have been good to elite? Answer = most Rodger = MOST.

Kosi is good.

Clarke was said to be 'elite' by some.

Ackland was good (top 10 B&F in a Prelim year).


In regards to distorting your words, you write so much crap and contradict yourself so often that it's very hard to follow.

One minute it's rookies. We get rookies and the impact is zero.

It's ruckmen. We get two and you brag about your 'wish list' being fulfilled. Impact - zero.

We need pace. Again your 'wish list' which you bragged about again is being taken on board by Lyon - impact zero.

Tactics. We get the perfect coach as you requested. Impact - zero.

More defensive. We concede more points than before - impact zero.

Now it's the list! It's recruiting! Then it morphed into development instead of recruiting!


Everything you pinpointed (eventually in your 1000 word posts) as 'the' problem has turned out to be garbage.

[saintsRrising]

also WCE traded for chick stenglein and others, .

Are either rejected GOPS???

I think both wanted to go home to WA (like GTrain coming back to Vic).


While I am generally in favour of keeping draft picks for kids and NEVER trading your first pick.....IF you are going to trade....then trade for players who havea genuine reason for moving...and who were not rejected by their clubs as not good enough.


Sydney (and I don't support their trading modle)ceratainly trade more than many clubs.....and some would definbately fit the reject criteria...ie the quick guy from Geelong, the young ruckman from the Cats...and the defender from the Dons. But they also snaggeda star in Hall....and spida is still good while admitdelly on the way out.

[saintsRrising]

Kosi is good.

Clarke was said to be 'elite' by some.

.

Kosi is a good player...probably a very good player.

But is hea good ruckman? at present no he is not. He is very poor at positionaing his body, and his tapwork is poor. He does havea good quarter every now and again...buta good ruckmna can ruck well throughout a game most weeks.


M Clarke WAS a very good, arguably elite, tap ruckman. Becuse of his around the ground work his rating I think would be good to very good.......with his tapwork being elite.

RL decided to use a cheap PSD pick on him as a back up in 2007. He was taken because our ruck stocks were poor......as either a back up...or No2 ruckman. He was not meant to be our No 1 ruck...and EVERYONE knew he was past his prime.

That was RL's view and I can understand his logic.

at the end pof last year I was hoping that Brooks could step up to be our No 2 ruck....

[rodgerfox]

Sydney (and I don't support their trading modle)ceratainly trade more than many clubs.....and some would definbately fit the reject criteria...ie the quick guy from Geelong, the young ruckman from the Cats...and the defender from the Dons. But they also snaggeda star in Hall....and spida is still good while admitdelly on the way out.

Brisbane also succeeded by trading for other club's trade bait.

Mal Michael.
Martin Pike.

Sydney as you mentioned do it consistently. Bolton (Craig), Jason Ball and plenty of others.

Port also do it - Motlop, Pickett, Rodan, Schofield, Montgomery.


Plenty of club's do it, and I believe you have to do it as long as you don't sacrifice too much to get them. They are on their last chance and know it. They have alot to prove.

[saintsRrising]

[One minute it's rookies. We get rookies and the impact is zero.

It's ruckmen. We get two and you brag about your 'wish list' being fulfilled. Impact - zero.

.

Zero???? curious eh...I thought Attard just won the rookie of the year award.....and played quitea few handy games for us????


Zero???? rookies are in the main not expected to DELIVER in there FIRST year....but rather year one is to asess and develop them....those deemed good enough are then developed and improved......like Priddis.


From this years crop we are in front of expectations

Attard has already delivered.

And I would expect that VR, Geary and probably Eddie will all be deemed worthy of further development.


Rookies area production line Rodger.....raw talent that has to be developed. Rookies should not be expected to be lucky dip players that will be instant footballers.


Neither should kids taken in the main draft.

[saintsRrising]

We need pace. Again your 'wish list' which you bragged about again is being taken on board by Lyon - impact zero.

.

Rodger....Ross is headed in the right direction....

I have ALWAYS said that it would take more than one draft period to fix our deficiences....ONE of which wasa lack of pace and run.

I have never said that Roos has "fixed" our pace problem.

[saintsRrising]

Plenty of club's do it, and I believe you have to do it as long as you don't sacrifice too much to get them. They are on their last chance and know it. They have alot to prove.

But that was GT's problem was it not...we always got screwed in draft deals that he manged once Waldron left.

When we were on the bottom...with the Smarts of Waldron and the allure of Blight we traded well......traded to advantage.

Post Waldron we got dudded....with Gram (nota rejected player) being about our only succesful trade.

[saintsRrising]

Brisbane also succeeded by trading for other club's trade bait.

Mal Michael.
Martin Pike.

.

Pike was alsoa Premiership player....and Mal while not as good at the Pies wasa handy player.





So what does this tell you.....yes there can be talent to be had.

BUT that post-Waldron the saints got dudded in deals more often than not. The person in overall charge of this process st**d up...and our current list is not as good as it should be.




Ifa club used very late picks and PSD picks...or rooki selections to give a player another go I am not that fussed....id they flop you have not lost much in terms of the oppourtunity cost of that pick being used ona kid.


But the Saints fritted away first, second round picks.

[rodgerfox]

[One minute it's rookies. We get rookies and the impact is zero.

It's ruckmen. We get two and you brag about your 'wish list' being fulfilled. Impact - zero.

.

Zero???? curious eh...I thought Attard just won the rookie of the year award.....and played quitea few handy games for us????


Zero???? rookies are in the main not expected to DELIVER in there FIRST year....but rather year one is to asess and develop them....those deemed good enough are then developed and improved......like Priddis.


From this years crop we are in front of expectations

Attard has already delivered.

And I would expect that VR, Geary and probably Eddie will all be deemed worthy of further development.


Rookies area production line Rodger.....raw talent that has to be developed. Rookies should not be expected to be lucky dip players that will be instant footballers.


Neither should kids taken in the main draft.

Disagree.

You keep throwing up the Eagles (cause they won the flag last year) for their rookies.

The year before (when Sydney won) it was their style.

Priddis has been a mature footballer in WA for some time. He wasn't developed as a rookie, he was made a rookie for cheap depth.

As most rookies are.

The fact that you have to turn them over regularly sort of contradicts the fact that they are there to be developed.


I don't think Attard delivered either. He wasn't in our best 22. And 'raw talent'?? He's been in the system for a while.

[saintsRrising]

In regards to distorting your words, you write so much crap and contradict yourself so often that it's very hard to follow.

.

Sorry that it was so hard for you to follow .......as it was in the first sentence..

Surprising how a few words confuses you so easily.

[Dan Warna]

Plenty of club's do it, and I believe you have to do it as long as you don't sacrifice too much to get them. They are on their last chance and know it. They have alot to prove.

But that was GT's problem was it not...we always got screwed in draft deals that he manged once Waldron left.

When we were on the bottom...with the Smarts of Waldron and the allure of Blight we traded well......traded to advantage.

Post Waldron we got dudded....with Gram (nota rejected player) being about our only succesful trade.

guerra = good player, wrong attitude
brooks = we needed a ruckman, highly rated junior, came to st kilda got injured
watts = replacement forward, highly rated junior, did well as a junior in the SANFL, came to st kilda got injured
hackland = his 2005 form was very good and stastically as good as charmans top years, 2006 tailed off and he was offered a ridiculous contract at Carlton
Knobel = ok ruckman, did serviceably well at st kilda
Penny = written of with injury
Heath Black = very good for us, walked for personal reasons
fiora = the best we could have got as black was walking regardless.
mcgough = i think a poor trade by us.

for talent for plugging gaps in our list, namely ruckmen (note 3 ruckmen selected) 1KPP defender traded and 1 KPP forward traded the only thing with the exception of mcgough is 1. they haven't come on as they promised, and 2. some walked for more money.

frankly knobel or hackland > Rix or Clarke, but would we have seriously matched the amount of money carlton or richmond threw at them?

who predicted penny's injuries?

Black wanted to come home, who predicted he wanted to go back to perth at the time?

Brooks, we desperatedly needed a ruckmen, we COULD have gone and tried to buy someone to replace spider, or we could try our luck in what was a thin draft or we went witih an outstanding junior who was 4th or 5th in line at his current club and develop him ourself.

frankly I dont think our trades with the exception of McGough were bad.

perhaps we can be accused of not identifying the motivation and attitude of some players, but for talent we pretty much got it right.

[rodgerfox]

We need pace. Again your 'wish list' which you bragged about again is being taken on board by Lyon - impact zero.

.

Rodger....Ross is headed in the right direction....

I have ALWAYS said that it would take more than one draft period to fix our deficiences....ONE of which wasa lack of pace and run.

I have never said that Roos has "fixed" our pace problem.

How has our supposed 'pace problem' headed in the right direction?

Jones is quick - but can't lay a tackle or even get to contests.

Armitage is slow.

You again are getting confused with what is actually happening and somehow twisting it around to feel you are vindicated in your incorrect opinions.

What direction are we headed in?

What had happened that will fix the 'pace problem'?

[saintsRrising]

You keep throwing up the Eagles (cause they won the flag last year) for their rookies.

.

You really do though up up some silly points.

Is it that hard to fathom that club can win a premiership due to a NUMBER of factors.

One such factor was that as I HIGHLIGHTED was that the Weagles exploited the rookie system better than anyone else.

I NEVER said it was the ONLY factor.,...nor implied it.

But yes it was one factor that helped them considerably.

[rodgerfox]

Sorry that it was so hard for you to follow .......as it was in the first sentence..

Surprising how a few words confuses you so easily.

It confused me because we have 'good' ruckmen.

And have had 'good' ruckmen in the past.

[saintsRrising]

We need pace. Again your 'wish list' which you bragged about again is being taken on board by Lyon - impact zero.

.

Rodger....Ross is headed in the right direction....

I have ALWAYS said that it would take more than one draft period to fix our deficiences....ONE of which wasa lack of pace and run.

I have never said that Roos has "fixed" our pace problem.

How has our supposed 'pace problem' headed in the right direction?

Jones is quick - but can't lay a tackle or even get to contests.

Armitage is slow.

You again are getting confused with what is actually happening and somehow twisting it around to feel you are vindicated in your incorrect opinions.

What direction are we headed in?

What had happened that will fix the 'pace problem'?

Headed in the right direction......means that you know where you want to go...but are not there yet...

[rodgerfox]

I NEVER said it was the ONLY factor.,...nor implied it.

You did imply it.

You even started a thread in which the title literally said it was THE area that was our problem.

You then harped on about West Coast having 34 rookies in their flag side.

You absolutely implied it, and bordered on saying it directly many times.

[rodgerfox]

Headed in the right direction......means that you know where you want to go...but are not there yet...

Oh!!

Well, now I can relax.

Now if we can just get Lyon to want to win a flag - we'll be right!!

Fucck. If it was that simple.

We've known where we want to go since 1901.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

And yes the Hawthorn strategy is smart to me.....

Just because it is simple or not complicated it does not mean that it is not smart....


There is no problems with BUSTs...as you cannot get every player right...and no club will.

You get in front however when you have a good return from your trade/draft cost.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Hawthorn strategy has been very smart - however where they're at is the end on the first phase of a rebuild. Very similar spot to where the Saints were at the end of '04.

Jury is out for me on Hawthorn for 2 reasons:
1) They're only reaching a point now where older players are going to be tempting... and trading in general, if they go for players under 25, I'll hold it as wise recruitment, but it's the same boat the Saints found themselves in: every trade will be scrutinised with the benefit of hindsight 2 years later.
2) I don't think the Hawks have had especially good return for their tradeing and drafting. They've traded for picks, and the one truism of drafting is that if you do the work, throw enough mud at the wall and some will stick. The Hawks have thrown more mud at the wall than anyone, and yet not had that much more stick - a fair bit of what has (outside the Hodge/Franklin) is (arguably) due to them fastracking and opening up the list spots.

The initial decision? Very smart. The perseverence. Smart. However, it's where they go from here that will be the judge for me on whether Hawthorn management has been good, or simply necessary. A premiership, and they look good, otherwise, it will be how they solidify the potential that is currently apparent for all to see.