dammit! steve may probs won't be eligible! he's 16 atm

I get the feeling he is still going to be eligible. Maybe a January birthday?

Who's Steve May?

who's steve may...you'll get to know him very well in the next 2 years

After watching the GF today and bemoaning another Hawthorn premiership... err Tassie premiership. I was despondent at the thought that this could be Carlton in a couple of years. I went to the footy record to try and make some sense out of how the Hawks had managed to assemble a premiership in the few short years since we had tumbled from pretenders to not-even-in-the-same-postcode!

There's a danger in over-analysing something like this and probably a bigger danger in trying to emulate a system you can't possibly implement.

From today's team Hawthorn have 12 listed players as first round draft picks of which ten played today. (the two who didn't were Muston and Thorp) They had five rookie listed players who also played today. Their two ruckman who I thought were more than serviceable were a rookie and second round pick - underlining why you probably shouldn't use pick one on a ruckman and casts a shadow over swapping an early pick for Warnock.

I'm not really that big on number crunching - but that's obviously a fair proportion of their team that are first round picks (much higher than say the Swans or Eagles had in their premiership years)

When I look at where we're heading I count ten listed first round picks. McLean, Sylvia, Morton, Grimes, Jones, Bate, Dunn, Bell, Frawley and Meesen. Obviously there's some problems there and the list should be shorter.

I suspect that some teams will follow suit. West Coast have seven first round draftees, and I think they'll add another three this year. I think they'll trade Kerr to Sydney for their first pick and the Dogs first pick (for O'Keefe) I expect they'll also try and offload Hansen and a couple of others for early picks. I also suspect with trading Kerr that a priority pick for 09 is on the cards.

It's tempting to think that with a little luck we could be ready to challenge again in a two or three years, but to win a premiership you need to be realistic, we need to get more class and hardness into our side. Everytime I watch a grand final it emphasises that courage never goes out of fashion. That's why I wouldn't trade McLean, Jones, Sylvia, Rivers or Green.

Good post 'grazman'.

Coaching staff are more important than people on this site think. A solidified, unified group with a plan and we have a chance. If we string up Bailey the same way Clarko nearly was strung up, then we will fail before we start our climb.

Coaching staff are more important than people on this site think.

Exactly.

You just have to look at what Daniher did and more importantly didn't do.

The simple fact is that there is not set formula to winning a premiership. Brisbane, Pt. Adelaide, West Coast, Sydney, Geelong and Hawthorn each constructed their lists through various methods. If we go down the same path as Hawthorn, there is no guarantee that we'll make the finals, let alone win a flag. You just need to develop a playing group capable of winning 14-16 games during the home and away season, and come finals time, anything can happen.

The other thing that came out of the GF, is how flawed it is try to emulate Geelong's game plan. They dominated in every key stat., inside 50's and contested possession, due to their elite midfield, yet weren't able to apply any scoreboard pressure because they overused the ball, and didn't play with a conventional forward set-up. Sounds familiar doesn't it, except that we couldn't win contested possession, and couldn't get the ball inside 50.

It just goes to show that even with the best midfield, a "run and carry" game plan can be dismantled if you apply pressure at the contest, and zone off in your backline.

Clarkson out-coached Thompson big time, and Thompson didn't have a plan B.

Why the hell did their best forward Steve Johnson, spend most of the game outside their forward 50?

Clarkson out-coached Thompson big time, and Thompson didn't have a plan B.

In my opinion, the biggest mistake Thompson made was his statement after the Preliminary Final that Varcoe would play. It locked him in, gave him no alternative but to play him, and, as I expected, Varcoe had a shocker.

Dropping Wojcinski was wrong. Kelly, Stokes, Varcoe and Hunt all played poorly and should all have gone before Wojcinski.

Bla bla bla, I don't like Mark Thompson.

And can I also mention this: to those who can't see Melbourne climbing up the ladder, the past 6 premierships have been won by 6 different teams, and every team has made a preliminary final since 2000. So there.

...

Clarkson out-coached Thompson big time, and Thompson didn't have a plan B.

...

Geelong lost because they couldn't buy a goal in the 2nd, and start of 3rd qtr.

7.5 instead of 1.11, and I reckon it was headed towards a blow out. Hawks were showing signs of panicking - Mitchell taking cheap shots. But you just don't get that many chances to stuff up, and still win. (Reminded me a little of our prelim win over Carltank in 2000. They just couldn't put us away. Flattered us hugely.)

Bla bla bla.

But winners are grinners.

Half of Geelong's points were rushed don't forget

Clarkson out-coached Thompson big time, and Thompson didn't have a plan B.

Why the hell did their best forward Steve Johnson, spend most of the game outside their forward 50?

I agree. Johnson and Bartel should've been moved forward at the start of the last quarter to isolate themselves in the forward fifty. Neither Ottens or Mooney was working for them and Varcoe and Stokes were a liability. Rushing behinds ensured that Hawthorn kept control of the ball and may have added to Geelong's mental torture in being able to steer one through the big sticks.

I agree. Johnson and Bartel should've been moved forward at the start of the last quarter to isolate themselves in the forward fifty. Neither Ottens or Mooney was working for them and Varcoe and Stokes were a liability. Rushing behinds ensured that Hawthorn kept control of the ball and may have added to Geelong's mental torture in being able to steer one through the big sticks.

Bartel was. But when they kicked it to him, they put it on top of his head, and he had 3 hawks to contend with.

I'm with you Demons06 I hope we bottom out next year and get pick 1 and 2.... I would rather have another year of pain but experience what the hawks supportors did yesterday.... I know bottoming out doesn't lock in a premiership but I think it would be worth it especially with the GC17 comprising 2010. I'm in two minds regarding trading players but I think anyone of 25 with value should go if we can get another pick inside the top 20.

People forgot on here that MElbourne were up and going leading into the 07 year but got dismantled with injuries. So we are now bottoming out but we could do anything in 09... if our players stay fit with no injuries we could hit the top 8 easily but then again we could not win a game.... It's a roll of the dice and hopefully the boys go alright but you won't see e complaining if we don';t

Depending on injuries and of course form we could win anything between 4 - 7 games next year. IMO most likely 4 which will give us a priority before the start of round one. This will give us a couple of highly rated youngsters in 2009.

To get the right mix you need a gun recruiting team and a little bit of luck, ie guns picked up at 17 and 19 this year AND Grimes and Maric become guns.

We are due for a turn in some drafting luck - it will come if we always stick to best available.

I think some of our young players who have been bagged a bit this year, eg Bate, Jones, Dunn, Newton may well pick up a fair bit as the team performance lifts.

I think Bailey would be planning for improvement next year and that is why will go hard for Warnock. He would be hoping to draft say Watts and trust that Newton gets his act together. Newton like most FF's needs good delivery which with Jones, Moloney , Davey and McLean should improve next year.

In my opinion, the biggest mistake Thompson made was his statement after the Preliminary Final that Varcoe would play. It locked him in, gave him no alternative but to play him, and, as I expected, Varcoe had a shocker.

Dropping Wojcinski was wrong. Kelly, Stokes, Varcoe and Hunt all played poorly and should all have gone before Wojcinski.

Bla bla bla, I don't like Mark Thompson.

And can I also mention this: to those who can't see Melbourne climbing up the ladder, the past 6 premierships have been won by 6 different teams, and every team has made a preliminary final since 2000. So there.

Totally agree with all of that, especially the bit about hating Mark Thompson.

I'd have dropped Stokes for Chapman, keeping in Wojo - who I've said before is actually quite underrated.

That's an interesting stat about the top 4, although, all things being equal, in the 9 years of this century (if you include '00), there's enough space in the top 4 to fit 36 different teams.

EDIT: PS, why is Thompson's nickname "Bomber?" Surely it's not just cause he captained the Dons in a Premiership. I mean, I've never heard the nickname "Bomber" Hird.

Pick 1 + 2 next year would do us a lot of good except can this club really survive another year down the bottom of the table? We're still 2 million in debt, we can't find a major sponser and we have the least supporters of any team in the country.

We can survive another year at the bottom. Easily. We just got to find a major sponsor this off season (priority number 1)

Break our membership record, IMO we will take a youth approach to the membership campaign, especially since we already know Hamish from hamish and andy will be spearheading the drive.

The AFL has already said 10 victorian teams is here to stay.

Pick 1 & 2 next year i am ALL for it. Little bit of short term pain for LONG term gain

- Five top 10 picks

- Four top 20 picks

- One top 30 picks

- Two top 40 picks

- Three top 50 picks

- One trade

- One pre-season selection

- Five rookie elevations

1991

Shane Crawford – AFL Draft (No.13)

1999

Tim Clarke – AFL Draft (No.33)

Chance Bateman – AFL Draft (No.48)

2000

Mark Williams – AFL Draft (No.43)

Robert Campbell – AFL Rookie Draft (No.27) – promoted to senior list 2001

2001

Luke Hodge – AFL Draft (No.1)

Rick Ladson – AFL Draft (No.16)

Campbell Brown – AFL Draft (No.32)

Sam Mitchell – AFL Draft (No.36)

2002

Tim Boyle – AFL Draft (No.51)

Brad Sewell – AFL Rookie Draft (No.7) – promoted to senior list 2003

* Michael Osborne – AFL Rookie Draft (No.23) – promoted to senior list 2003

2003

* Trent Croad – Exchange period (traded by Fremantle)

Danny Jacobs – Exchange period (traded by Essendon)

Zac Dawson – AFL Draft (No.41)

2004

Jarryd Roughead – AFL Draft (No.2)

Lance Franklin – AFL Draft (No.5)

Jordan Lewis – AFL Draft (No.7)

Tom Murphy – AFL Draft (No.21)

Simon Taylor – AFL Draft (No.53)

Clinton Young – AFL Rookie Draft (No.18) – promoted to senior list 2005

2005

Travis Tuck – Father/Son selection, AFL Draft (No.38)

Xavier Ellis – AFL Draft (No.3)

Beau Dowler – AFL Draft (No.6)

Grant Birchall – AFL Draft (No.14)

Max Bailey – AFL Draft (No.18)

Beau Muston – AFL Draft (No.22)

Brent Guerra – AFL Pre-Season Draft (No.3)

Luke McEntee – AFL Rookie Draft (No.3) – promoted to senior list 2007

Stephen Gilham – AFL Rookie Draft (No.34) – promoted to senior list 2006

Ben McGlynn – AFL Rookie Draft (No.55) – promoted to senior list 2006

2006

Josh Kennedy – Father/Son selection, AFL Draft (No.40)

Mitch Thorp – AFL Draft (No.6)

Brent Renouf – AFL Draft (No.24)

Jarryd Morton – AFL Draft (No.33)

Garry Moss – AFL Draft (No.56)

Matthew Suckling – AFL Rookie Draft (No.22)

2007

Cyril Rioli – AFL Draft (No.12)

Brendan Whitecross – AFL Draft (No.29)

Stuart Dew – AFL Draft (No.45)

Hugh Sandilands – AFL Rookie Draft (No.11)

Tim Walsh – AFL Rookie Draft (No.27)

Alex Grima – AFL Rookie Draft (No.42)

Cameron Stokes – AFL Rookie Draft (No.54)

Notes:

* For players who have been recruited by Hawthorn or another club more than once, it includes their most recent draft/trade acquisition

* Croad was originally drafted in the 1997 AFL Draft (No.3)

* Osborne was originally drafted in the 2000 AFL Rookie Draft (No.11)

what u have to understand is hawks have so many rookies who have become fantastic players. There all in bold above and most are A grade players( whoes that played on saturday). For melbourne, it will take time and a long long time i believe. I honestly dont think we are a chance for a premiership for 6 years. We have no full back, no half back, no quality chf and no quality ff. Hawks recruited by focusing on the spine 1st. thats what we need to do, hence the Jack Watts likely pickup.

[quote name='Chook' date='Sep 28 2008,

"Totally agree with all of that, especially the bit about hating Mark Thompson."

He lost me with his comments after King kicked White's face in. He defended King by saying he risked injury to his foot!

If draft picks are the answer then what does that make of the first 130 odd Premiers pre-draft?

The analysis on rucks is bulldust, if its a quality player and they are available you consider them, whether they are a back pocket, a full forward or a ruckmen is irrelevant. You could just as easily pluck out the numbers of any other Premier and find that their rucks are pick 90 or pick 3.

You could just as easily have made the same damning analysis of the Hawks first rounders 3 years ago.

Drafts are helpful in identifying class, its useless for identifying hardness though. Premiership teams are builts from the ground up, from the first pick to the last pick, I agree with the viability of the rebuild model, there is no evidence that Pick 1 & 2 as opposed to Pick 10 & rookie will get you over the line though.

Can't recall personally when a premiership side had a ruckman taken in the top 10 of a draft aside from Ottens last year.

imo better to get serviceable big men and built a good midfield around them.

Sandilands is living proof a ruckman is nothing without good onballers

hawthorn were appalling in 2005, I dare say worse than us this year.

4 years later they are Premiers.

Can't recall personally when a premiership side had a ruckman taken in the top 10 of a draft aside from Ottens last year.

imo better to get serviceable big men and built a good midfield around them.

Sandilands is living proof a ruckman is nothing without good onballers

Well theres only 1 starting ruck in a teams 22 and theres been 22 drafts, so 1 would be about right wouldnt it? I love the comparisons to a draft history that barely spanes 2 decades. I suppose it was uncomparable aliens playing footy for the first 130 years?

imo better to get the best players and build a team around them.

I would have thought the fact that many gun rucks come from late picks & many gun mids come from high picks has more to do their being 3 rucks on a list & 30 odd mids than anything else.

I tried making that point about it being easier to pick a gem midfielder from a late pick and got flamed by a few people but I won't do the same to you

I'm just trying to say that I'd take Robbie Campbell and Taylor (reckon he should have played against Renouf) with the likes of Mitchell, Lewis, Sewell at his feet over Ottens and Sandilands with McDonald caliber players at their feet

I tried making that point about it being easier to pick a gem midfielder from a late pick and got flamed by a few people but I won't do the same to you

I'm just trying to say that I'd take Robbie Campbell and Taylor (reckon he should have played against Renouf) with the likes of Mitchell, Lewis, Sewell at his feet over Ottens and Sandilands with McDonald caliber players at their feet

I don't know. If I could have Cox and Sandilands (who I think deserved his All-Australian spot) ruck duo, roved by a second-tier midfield, I might take it. What I'm trying to say is that a great ruck duo is more valuable than two great ruck-rovers. But I'd prefer a so-so ruck division accompanied by three or four great midfielders, as the Hawks and Cats have.