Analysis Derek Hine leaves the Pies

[JLC]

It was the end of the Judkins era shortly after that.

Didn't Judkins get done for being a spy?

 

[Kirby]

Didn't Judkins get done for being a spy?

I understand that he enjoyed a drink.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

It was the end of the Judkins era shortly after that.

Judkins was around for another 4 drafts after that.

 

[Kirby]

Judkins was around for another 4 drafts after that.

Until another dud Tasmanian pick finished him off.

 

[doofdoof]

He talks about it here:

Malthouse had fine-tuned aspects of his preferred game model, basing much of the club’s frenetic pressure on – of all things – the Roman army formation and German World War II strategist Field Marshall Erwin Rommel.

He said after Collingwood had won the 2010 flag by 56 points: “I looked at the Roman legion, which is in a box formation and very hard to penetrate. The box can get smaller and smaller, but you’ve always got fighting capabilities all the way through, which we’ve pushed in front of our opponents for the last two years.

There's no "I" in team. Mick will never change.

This still doesn't explain the sudden change in 2009 of trading for a proven big-bodied tap ruckman. I don't recall ruckman in the roman legions.

 

[Mark W]

You've just laid out some solid data points to justify your hypothesis, although I could argue that a) Mick did recruit Steve McKee to play for us through the early 2000s. And he also recruited Chris Bryan prior to 2009, and Leigh Brown.
Also, while 2 and 3 are accurate, I don't see any evidence of causation. Ball was also recruited in 2009. Buckley (as you've pointed out) joined the panel in 2009. Do you feel that Buckley therefore pushed to recruit Ball? Also, you are ruling out the lessons that MM would have learned over the prior 3 years around the insufficiency of his current ruck crop.

I feel like Jolly's recruitment was even deeper than than just new assistant coaching joining and arguing for a player and more about a club wide game plan adjustment and adding players that augment the new gameplan.

1. MM realised he needed a new game plan prior to 2010 and structured his new plan around the 'forward press'.
2. For the forward press to be successful, all opposition kicks need to be under pressure (to set up for the intercept markers 50m behind play).
3. For there to be pressure on the kickers, the core ball movement needed to be highly contested and highly stoppage based, including the moving of the ball foward around the boundary line predominantly.
4. To succeed in a highly stoppage based gameplan, you need a strong ruckman and a strong inside midfield.
5. The recruiting team (may or not have included the brand new assistant coach) identified Darren Jolly and Luke Ball as two additions to the team to help enable the new game plan that he devised.

Lets not forget that we also gave up a first round draft pick for Cameron Wood, which sounds ridiculous now, but at the time he was a rated highly

Its just nonsense to argue that MM didnt try and address the ruck issue

 

[doofdoof]

Lets not forget that we also gave up a first round draft pick for Cameron Wood, which sounds ridiculous now, but at the time he was a rated highly

Its just nonsense to argue that MM didnt try and address the ruck issue

Correct.

Mick tried and failed until Bucks was appointed to the coaching group and they went down a new path

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Lets not forget that we also gave up a first round draft pick for Cameron Wood, which sounds ridiculous now, but at the time he was a rated highly

Its just nonsense to argue that MM didnt try and address the ruck issue

Wood was the first and only time he tried though up until that point. That was 2008. Wood was a bad choice. In 2009 he went a step better and picked up Leigh Brown, and finally in 2010 found a real ruckman.

 

[Jelly Bean]

Correct.

Mick tried and failed until Bucks was appointed to the coaching group and they went down a new path

Scott Waters and Max Hudgton also joined the coaching panel for 2010. Why do you think it was Bucks and not one of them that drove the recruitment of Darren Jolly?

And why are you ruling out one of the other assistant coaches who were there in 2009 not pushing for Jolly based on what they saw themselves through the year?

 

[Harry O]

Until another dud Tasmanian pick finished him off.

He got Dane Swan and Tarrant didn’t he?

 

[Kirby]

He got Dane Swan and Tarrant didn’t he?

Yep and ????

 

[doofdoof]

Scott Waters and Max Hudgton also joined the coaching panel for 2010. Why do you think it was Bucks and not one of them that drove the recruitment of Darren Jolly?

And why are you ruling out one of the other assistant coaches who were there in 2009 not pushing for Jolly based on what they saw themselves through the year?

Sure it could have been. However, neither of them had played for Mick for ten years without a dominant tap ruckman.

At least you're now admitting that Mick may not have driven the recruitment of Jolly.

Strangely, the Bucks hatred is pretty strong around here.

 

[regpies]

Data?

How about evidence? Collingwood didn't recruit a big-bodied ruckman, even though there were numerous opportunities over the prior 10 years, until Bucks joined the coaching panel.

All three of these things actually happened:

1. Mick did not recruit a big-bodied ruckman between 2000-2009
2. Bucks joined the coaching panel in 2009
3. Collingwood recruited Darren Jolly in 2009

Feel free to provide data to refute my evidence.

Bucks would have had zero to do with recruiting Jolly. He was an assistant who just joined. Not a head coach or list manager.

Mick recruited Steve McKee early 2000s to help Josh Fraser in his early years.

We recruited other ruck spuds like Bryan and Wood before Jolly.

 

[Hot Dogma]

Some of Buckley's thoughts on Ruckman:

“It’s not necessarily if ruckmen are overrated, it’s if ruckwork is overrated,”

“I think there’s so much that happens into a clearance and then into scores or field position from a clearance that I think we overrate hit-outs."

"If you allow Gawn to win hit-outs but you’re sharking against whoever is at ground level, you can still have a really effective clearance game and blunt a strength really quickly."

“If you win hit-outs, you’re just under 50-50 to win the game. So it has no direct correlation on outcome at all."

“But hit-outs and ruckwork in its purest form, it’s not where it’s at.”

 

[76woodenspooners]

Some of Buckley's thoughts on Ruckman:

“It’s not necessarily if ruckmen are overrated, it’s if ruckwork is overrated,”

“I think there’s so much that happens into a clearance and then into scores or field position from a clearance that I think we overrate hit-outs."

"If you allow Gawn to win hit-outs but you’re sharking against whoever is at ground level, you can still have a really effective clearance game and blunt a strength really quickly."

“If you win hit-outs, you’re just under 50-50 to win the game. So it has no direct correlation on outcome at all."

“But hit-outs and ruckwork in its purest form, it’s not where it’s at.”

I guess the hit out stat is a bit misleading. Pretty sure it just means which ruckman touched the footy.

So an uncontested ruck where a ruckman has free rein to direct the footy to his team’s clear advantage ….

… is measured the same way as a ruckman who manages to make superficial contact with the footy in a heavily contested rucking contest.

 

[Kappa]

Some of Buckley's thoughts on Ruckman:

“It’s not necessarily if ruckmen are overrated, it’s if ruckwork is overrated,”

“I think there’s so much that happens into a clearance and then into scores or field position from a clearance that I think we overrate hit-outs."

"If you allow Gawn to win hit-outs but you’re sharking against whoever is at ground level, you can still have a really effective clearance game and blunt a strength really quickly."

“If you win hit-outs, you’re just under 50-50 to win the game. So it has no direct correlation on outcome at all."

“But hit-outs and ruckwork in its purest form, it’s not where it’s at.”

The vast majority of hit outs are just ruckman wrestling and getting a finger on the ball and sending it no where.

I would wager that hit outs to advantage do matter, and we’ve scored plenty of goals from the ruckman tapping to a player moving thru the stoppage and snapping the goal

 

[Jelly Bean]

Sure it could have been. However, neither of them had played for Mick for ten years without a dominant tap ruckman.

At least you're now admitting that Mick may not have driven the recruitment of Jolly.

Strangely, the Bucks hatred is pretty strong around here.

First of all, I am not admitting either way that someone other than MM or MM himself drove recruitment, I am just showing you your rationale and pointing out that there are others that are candidates based on your own 'evidence'. Secondly, I don't hate Bucks - I actually rate him very highly. I am just don't find it a convincing argument that he singularly drove the recruitment of a player when he had barely started in the role, and wasn't in recruiting/list management.

My hypothesis is that Mick and his senior coaching staff came up with the new game plan probably in 2008 / 2009, and together with his list management team knew that they needed 1-2 more pieces to make it truly effective, and then went and got those pieces.

 

[jmac70]

First of all, I am not admitting either way that someone other than MM or MM himself drove recruitment, I am just showing you your rationale and pointing out that there are others that are candidates based on your own 'evidence'. Secondly, I don't hate Bucks - I actually rate him very highly. I am just don't find it a convincing argument that he singularly drove the recruitment of a player when he had barely started in the role, and wasn't in recruiting/list management.

My hypothesis is that Mick and his senior coaching staff came up with the new game plan probably in 2008 / 2009, and together with his list management team knew that they needed 1-2 more pieces to make it truly effective, and then went and got those pieces.

Eddie drove the recruitment of Ball and Jolly after the humiliating 2009 PF loss.

 

[Pistol Night]

Eddie drove the recruitment of Ball and Jolly after the humiliating 2009 PF loss.

If Carlton weren't dodgey flogs we would of had Judd also. He wanted to come to us but we couldn't match the $5 billion dollar cardboard box ambassadorship from the scum. Imagine Swan, Judd and Pendles in the same midfield

 

[Jelly Bean]

If Carlton weren't dodgey flogs we would of had Judd also. He wanted to come to us but we couldn't match the $5 billion dollar cardboard box ambassadorship from the scum. Imagine Swan, Judd and Pendles in the same midfield

The issue was we couldn't trade for him. We had no trade capital, and Carlton had tonnes.

 

[Pistol Night]

The issue was we couldn't trade for him. We had no trade capital, and Carlton had tonnes.

Thats the advantage of being shit for years and stockpiling top picks. Ironic Kennedy won a flag

 

[Mollythedolly]

Thats the advantage of being shit for years and stockpiling top picks. Ironic Kennedy won a flag

More poetic justice.

 

[jmac70]

Wait…Hine’s left the Pies?

Where did he go?

 

[BEEG]

Wait…Hine’s left the Pies?

Where did he go?

The glue factory.

 

[timokane]

Word around the Pies that Kevin Sheehan will become Pies talent and draft manager in 2025 on a 3 year contract.