Chris Pelchen

Remove this Banner Ad

Re: Chris Pelchin

Bit of talk around that Gold Coast are keen to regain the compo pick we gave Norf. Be interesting to see if this eventuates and what North will get out of it.
 
Re: Chris Pelchin

TylerDurden said:
Nail....head.

Clarko had his say on Dew - that was about it. He's too busy working on gameplan, etc..
Click to expand...

I agree with your point, Pelchen must have the final say he has to justify his position going forward and create a balanced list for the future, the coach might get the bullet but the head of recruiting has to leave a list in place for future coaches.

What I always thought was though that certain trades idea must have come from Clarkson's instigation, those that spring to mind are former Port Adelaide players that have been brought on board, so like you say Dew, everyone knows was a Clarko idea and Pelchen wasn't keen, I'd figure that Guerra, Gilham and Burgoyne were trades that were instigated by Clarkson.

I would imagine that any trades for experienced players that have been in the system a while would usually need the coaches blessing at least, otherwise you risk bringing someone in who won't get played.On the other hand you'd imagine that the drafting would be largely left up to Pelchen with Clarkson giving input into the types of players that he felt were neccessary.

It's hard to believe with the Hale trade that Clarkson wouldn't have been fully behind it but you never know.

My view is that under Pelchen our picking up of players who've been in the system has been better than our drafting, is this a reflection on Clarkson's input...very possibly.

The thing with this trade that does puzzle me is what happens if Bailey is right to go for the whole year, it seems hard to have them both in the side together, you'd imagine that you'd want one of the them with Renouf (or perhaps Skipper if Renouf were to be injured).And so to use that pick on a player who conceivably might not be a regular part of the 22 seems a bit of a gamble.
 
Re: Chris Pelchin

Dipper said:
I agree with your point, Pelchen must have the final say he has to justify his position going forward and create a balanced list for the future, the coach might get the bullet but the head of recruiting has to leave a list in place for future coaches.

What I always thought was though that certain trades idea must have come from Clarkson's instigation, those that spring to mind are former Port Adelaide players that have been brought on board, so like you say Dew, everyone knows was a Clarko idea and Pelchen wasn't keen, I'd figure that Guerra, Gilham and Burgoyne were trades that were instigated by Clarkson.

I would imagine that any trades for experienced players that have been in the system a while would usually need the coaches blessing at least, otherwise you risk bringing someone in who won't get played.On the other hand you'd imagine that the drafting would be largely left up to Pelchen with Clarkson giving input into the types of players that he felt were neccessary.

It's hard to believe with the Hale trade that Clarkson wouldn't have been fully behind it but you never know.

My view is that under Pelchen our picking up of players who've been in the system has been better than our drafting, is this a reflection on Clarkson's input...very possibly.

The thing with this trade that does puzzle me is what happens if Bailey is right to go for the whole year, it seems hard to have them both in the side together, you'd imagine that you'd want one of the them with Renouf (or perhaps Skipper if Renouf were to be injured).And so to use that pick on a player who conceivably might not be a regular part of the 22 seems a bit of a gamble.
Click to expand...
I think it would be a greater gamble to rely on Bailey for the year. Any games we get from Bailey at this point are a bonus. Certainty can't plan a season around him
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Re: Chris Pelchin

Dipper said:
I agree with your point, Pelchen must have the final say he has to justify his position going forward and create a balanced list for the future, the coach might get the bullet but the head of recruiting has to leave a list in place for future coaches.

What I always thought was though that certain trades idea must have come from Clarkson's instigation, those that spring to mind are former Port Adelaide players that have been brought on board, so like you say Dew, everyone knows was a Clarko idea and Pelchen wasn't keen, I'd figure that Guerra, Gilham and Burgoyne were trades that were instigated by Clarkson.

I would imagine that any trades for experienced players that have been in the system a while would usually need the coaches blessing at least, otherwise you risk bringing someone in who won't get played.On the other hand you'd imagine that the drafting would be largely left up to Pelchen with Clarkson giving input into the types of players that he felt were neccessary.

It's hard to believe with the Hale trade that Clarkson wouldn't have been fully behind it but you never know.

My view is that under Pelchen our picking up of players who've been in the system has been better than our drafting, is this a reflection on Clarkson's input...very possibly.

The thing with this trade that does puzzle me is what happens if Bailey is right to go for the whole year, it seems hard to have them both in the side together, you'd imagine that you'd want one of the them with Renouf (or perhaps Skipper if Renouf were to be injured).And so to use that pick on a player who conceivably might not be a regular part of the 22 seems a bit of a gamble.
Click to expand...

A point to consider: Remember that Pelchen was at Port Adelaide as recruiter before coming to Hawthorn....
 
Re: Chris Pelchin

xellis said:
I think it would be a greater gamble to rely on Bailey for the year. Any games we get from Bailey at this point are a bonus. Certainty can't plan a season around him
Click to expand...

Well that's what I would have thought but then why this week was Pelchen so bullish about Bailey saying that he'd be playing round 1, I only read that on here so I stand to be corrected.

On balance I think you're right but on the one hand it seems like the trade is done as insurance on Bailey not coming good on the other hand he's talking up that he'll be fine.

In the end to me then trade has merit just seems a little over the odds.That pick has more value if deferred so for the right club it has more value than if it were to be used in this year's draft.

We'll see I guess, at least we won't die wondering.
 
Re: Chris Pelchin

Dipper said:
Well that's what I would have thought but then why this week was Pelchen so bullish about Bailey saying that he'd be playing round 1, I only read that on here so I stand to be corrected.

On balance I think you're right but on the one hand it seems like the trade is done as insurance on Bailey not coming good on the other hand he's talking up that he'll be fine.
Click to expand...

Correct, due diligence I would have thought, particularly after limping into 6 games with only the one fit ruckman this year.

Dipper said:
In the end to me then trade has merit just seems a little over the odds.That pick has more value if deferred so for the right club it has more value than if it were to be used in this year's draft.

We'll see I guess, at least we won't die wondering.
Click to expand...

Pick would have been mid to high twenties, not nineteen as some have suggested - could still be a price to pay, and depending on how you look at it there always will be - however, if Pelchen can snare Hill for 52, we've bolstered the side substantially for C. Brown and a 4th round pick.

Not bad, not bad at all.
 
Re: Chris Pelchin

TAITA said:
Correct, due diligence I would have thought, particularly after limping into 6 games with only the one fit ruckman this year.



Pick would have been mid to high twenties, not nineteen as some have suggested - could still be a price to pay, and depending on how you look at it there always will be - however, if Pelchen can snare Hill for 52, we've bolstered the side substantially for C. Brown and a 4th round pick.

Not bad, not bad at all.
Click to expand...

What has been wasted if the above comments are true:

- 2005 1st round selection - pick #6 - Beau Dowler
- 2005 2nd round selection - pick #22 - Beau Muston
- 2006 1st round selection - Pick #6 - Mitch Thorpe
- 2006 2nd round selection - Pick # 33 - Jarryd Morton

What we could have had

- 2005: pick 6 - 33: Patty Ryder, Mitch Clarke, Shannon Hurn, Travis Varcoe, Richard Douglas, Paul Bower, Garrick Ibbotson, Bernie Vince, Sam Gilbert

- 2006: pick 6 - 37: Joel Selwood, Ben Reid, Nathan Brown, James Frawley, Jack Riewoldt, Mitch Brown, Shaun Hampson, Leroy Jetta, Kurt Tippet, Goldstein.

I know the draft is a gamble but have we wasted four picks that could have provided us with some awesome players.

Imagine our 2005 picks (#6) was used on say Mitch Clarke and pick 22 was used on Sam Gilbert

Imagine our 2006 picks were used on Selwood and Frawley.

We would have a ripping list..... What could have been!!


Remember, the dogs recruited Josh Hill in the 2006 draft with pick #61. Right now he is worth no more than a late 3rd round pick but if we got him with #51, well i think we have traded well Brown + 51 for Hale and hill.
 
Re: Chris Pelchin

Dimi Pumpa every club in the league is littered with examples of picks that didn't work.

In fact, every gun that was selected 2nd Round or lower (worse) has a 'what if' story as he could have been with literally any other club had they selected him. This works for the clubs too - an unbeatable All Start team could be compiled by any club if they had 4 years of hindsight to work with.

We had a few drafts that didn't work out; but we also absolutely dominated other drafts. Geelong are happy with their 2001 drafting, but we smashed it - more so considering we got an extra Top 10 Pick for the price of a 2nd Rounder in Hale. The Buddy / Roughy / Lewis year was fairly special for us also!

I am not saying you are right, wrong or on the border mate - just pointing out that looking at historical data in isolation can be detrimental to making a sound analysis.

* I appreciate that this thread is about Pelchen & not drafting in general - I just wanted to make the point (to all) that drafting is not an exact science; and that the Pelican's position is not a 1-week contract once a year*.
 
Re: Chris Pelchin

Brant said:
Dimi Pumpa every club in the league is littered with examples of picks that didn't work.

In fact, every gun that was selected 2nd Round or lower (worse) has a 'what if' story as he could have been with literally any other club had they selected him. This works for the clubs too - an unbeatable All Start team could be compiled by any club if they had 4 years of hindsight to work with.

We had a few drafts that didn't work out; but we also absolutely dominated other drafts. Geelong are happy with their 2001 drafting, but we smashed it - more so considering we got an extra Top 10 Pick for the price of a 2nd Rounder in Hale. The Buddy / Roughy / Lewis year was fairly special for us also!

I am not saying you are right, wrong or on the border mate - just pointing out that looking at historical data in isolation can be detrimental to making a sound analysis.

* I appreciate that this thread is about Pelchen & not drafting in general - I just wanted to make the point (to all) that drafting is not an exact science; and that the Pelican's position is not a 1-week contract once a year*.
Click to expand...

Dimmeys must be pretty proud of that post, I've just replied to a cut and paste on another thread in this forum - anyone might think he was the first one who ever thought of such drafting blunders and 'who we could've had'.
 
Re: Chris Pelchin

Brant said:
Dimi Pumpa every club in the league is littered with examples of picks that didn't work.

In fact, every gun that was selected 2nd Round or lower (worse) has a 'what if' story as he could have been with literally any other club had they selected him. This works for the clubs too - an unbeatable All Start team could be compiled by any club if they had 4 years of hindsight to work with.

We had a few drafts that didn't work out; but we also absolutely dominated other drafts. Geelong are happy with their 2001 drafting, but we smashed it - more so considering we got an extra Top 10 Pick for the price of a 2nd Rounder in Hale. The Buddy / Roughy / Lewis year was fairly special for us also!

I am not saying you are right, wrong or on the border mate - just pointing out that looking at historical data in isolation can be detrimental to making a sound analysis.

* I appreciate that this thread is about Pelchen & not drafting in general - I just wanted to make the point (to all) that drafting is not an exact science; and that the Pelican's position is not a 1-week contract once a year*.
Click to expand...


Fair call Brant and good post. It becomes frustratin as a supporter to see low picks lost in such a way. It's not even about Pelchin.... it's about general recruitment.

You will not always win... you are correct. Draft is a gamble but the whole point is we wasted 2 pick 6's on players that had proven injuries. You would take a gamble with a later pick if you were that keen not a pick 6. That is not logical.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Regarding the Hale trade though - Surely Adam Simpson had a little to do with it???

It in pretty interesting to note that since he came on board we have picked up two of his former teammates. Having the inside line is certainly beneficial in knowing the capabilities of a player - although sometimes it can perhaps make one biased.


Clarko is obviously a fan of this model - Given Guerra, Gilham, Dew, Burger....



Now we have Gibbo and Hale from North.





It can't be argued that this hasn't worked - Every one bar Hale (yet) has or will prove to be a very positive addition. Rather than looking at this as a Poor mans Jolly - look at it as a tall mans Dew.
 
wallyt99 said:
Regarding the Hale trade though - Surely Adam Simpson had a little to do with it???

It in pretty interesting to note that since he came on board we have picked up two of his former teammates. Having the inside line is certainly beneficial in knowing the capabilities of a player - although sometimes it can perhaps make one biased.


Clarko is obviously a fan of this model - Given Guerra, Gilham, Dew, Burger....



Now we have Gibbo and Hale from North.





It can't be argued that this hasn't worked - Every one bar Hale (yet) has or will prove to be a very positive addition. Rather than looking at this as a Poor mans Jolly - look at it as a tall mans Dew.
Click to expand...

Perhaps we should have made a play for Gavin Brown (collingwood) SOS (St Kilda) and maybe someone from geelong.

Pretty good assistant coaches too
 
tazhawk said:
Roughead and Buddy ahead of Tambling.

Game over.

It is an easy game you are playing.
Click to expand...

Statistically Tambling has surpassed Roughead and quite easily, it's really a matter of opinion who is the superior footballer. In regards to Buddy it wasn't our astute drafting it was the total ineptnes if Richmond that allowed our star to come to us.

Very easy game were playing, our strike rate to strike out is far less accomodating. You want to continue nerd?
 
tige19 said:
Statistically Tambling has surpassed Roughead

Very easy game were playing, our strike rate to strike out is far less accomodating. You want to continue nerd?
Click to expand...


Statistically Joel Bowden has surpassed J Brown, Riewoldt, Franklin etc over the years. Great call. :thumbsu: :rolleyes:

Lets go by stats comparing a midfielder to a KP forward.
 
Re: Chris Pelchin

junior27 said:
The good news with Pelchen getting Hale is that regardless of the target he almost always seems to get his man every trade period.

The only one we haven't got in recent memory is Tarrant.

I wish we could swap Tarrant and Hale around though.

$400k pa for Hale....
I would have thought $400k for an elite outside midfielder would have been a better decision!


Stay tuned though...the Hawks have something else in the making !
Click to expand...

Mundy and Thornton twice say hi.
 
AmI the only one who sees that pick 37 in this draft is way worse than Josh Hill?

- Gold Coast could wrap up the best 12 17 year olds a couple of years ago.
- This means pick 37 is more like pick 49.
- Josh Hill is 21 and has kicked 54 goals in 35 games.
- We have no forward setup to speak of, if Buddy, Roughead or Hale do not mark the ball. Other than Buddy picking it up himself.
- Hooper and Peterson losses are devastating.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Chris Pelchen

Similar threads

Strapping Young Lad
News Christmas at Bunjil Bagora - HFC family day and open training, Sat 10th Dec
Replies
8
Views
850
Yardie
Yardie

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top