Review Hamish 2021

Remove this Banner Ad

Mutineer said:
The game changer is he finally has his body right after experiencing severe back spasms after his car accident, hence the fact he has mentioned several times the fitness/conditioning department have been able to work on strengthening him through the core. Then Covid struck last year, hardly the time for a developing player playing in a team getting flogged for most of the season. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating.

Click to expand...

I Actually reacon hes been one of our best players this year.. first few games he wasnt pretty but was getting the job done and he even got us over the line in a couple of games especially that last quarter effort in that suns game..

last few games hes stepped it up a notch and seems to just have more and more time on his hands and is far cleaner with the ball.. i always reacon thats one massive sign a young player has taken the next step, when they start looking like they just have a lot more time on their hands when they get the ball..

you know when you see that panicky “oh shit, i’ve got it, now what do I do, what do I do” look they get and then inevitably get caught holding it when most young players get the ball in their first dozen or so games..

Ned had that for a bit there but hes worked it out and now seems to find himself in time and space and making good decisions.

hes also still been among our best in some of our worst losses. I dont think “giving up” is something young Ned does often..

also.. gotta love his niggle.. its easy to see he shits opposition players off.
 
Sanders said:
Appreciate the effort, and thought that has gone into this even if I disagree (which I do). a proper, thoughtful argument will never see you go too far wrong.

the analysis though revolves around a central premise (see bold). if that's not correct, then the rest struggles to hold up.

I don't think you can say that recruits getting a game is a reasonable standard, for 2 reasons:
1. getting a game at the wooden spoon team is different to being best 22 at a flag contender.
2. more importantly, there is a difference between getting a good ordinary 20-25 ranked player, and a top 5-10 player on a list.

if you continually recruit players who are not flops, are contenders for the back end of the 22 you will pass this test and end up in the bottom section of the table as we are. part of good, is how good and what cost. and what is the base rate of such successes across the league, the bayesian success.

comparing to other talent taken at around the same place, is built into the base rate.

there is a portfolio approach here, where successes and failures are given, but over a period of time you need some big wins to pay for the expected losses. we don't have too many big wins, not at the high cost of the pointy end of the draft, nor the occasional windfall at the end.

you cannot fund your stake if all you get is small wins and a usual amount of losses. Hamish, in place since 2012, has an unusual amount of bigger stake losses (first round losses cost more than 4th round flops) than he has small wins. a first round pick who gets a game, but is a back end of the 22 player is still a loss.

whatever the reasons, a near ten year portfolio should have some wins that rise above all other factors, to compensate for the cost of the punt. and there is such a paucity of them, we've gone trod water, slipped back over a number of years until our nose was bust below the waterline
Click to expand...

Rather than the rinse and repeat of this thread. See earlier
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Mr_Moogle said:
lol so we take a downhill skier like James Rowe and pass on Luke Edwards and people still stick up for Hamish. Get rid of this campaigner.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with us taking a punt on Rowe. Small forward was/is a need

That extra year for D Mac on the other hand...
 
Drugs Are Bad Mackay? said:
I have no problem with us taking a punt on Rowe. Small forward was/is a need

That extra year for D Mac on the other hand...
Click to expand...
Exactly. Chock up another list management casualty caused by us extending cooked/mediocre senior players for seasons too long
 
Mr_Moogle said:
How many ******* times have I heard people say we draft on talent first, needs second. What a ******* joke.
Click to expand...

We do, if it's an early pick. 38 is not an early pick.

The decision to draft Rowe ended up being a pretty sound one, considering what occurred with Stengle. Now, bringing in Mitch Hinge as a DFA... that one needs a fair bit of scrutiny, seeing that would have been the list spot for Luke Edwards.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mr_Moogle said:
Yeah we nailed an intercept defender years ago, meanwhile our midfield is ******* atrocious and we just passed on a decent father son mid so we could have a downhill skier small forward who has no future at the level. Really great work.
Click to expand...
The choice would have been to draft Berry or Edwards.
 
ABAB said:
The choice would have been to draft Berry or Edwards.
Click to expand...

Negative.

There were three choices. Draft Rowe, bring in Hinge or bring in Hately or Edwards. Seeing both Hinge and Hately took away our 6th draftee spot, which could have been used on Luke.

Rowe has proved a prudent pick so far, with Stengle career ending, and Newchurch being a very raw prospect. No way you turn down Hately for free either, that's instant firing territory (as much as he's struggled so far). Hinge though, well that decision hasn't been aging well at all. Hopefully he stays healthy next year to get a shot to show something.
 
Mr_Moogle said:
Yeah we nailed an intercept defender years ago, meanwhile our midfield is ******* atrocious and we just passed on a decent father son mid so we could have a downhill skier small forward who has no future at the level. Really great work.
Click to expand...
Edwards, good luck to him, he’d be like the Last McGarey medalist that was on their list.
 
Golumless said:
Negative.

There were three choices. Draft Rowe, bring in Hinge or bring in Hately or Edwards. Seeing both Hinge and Hately took away our 6th draftee spot, which would have been used on Luke.

Rowe has proved a prudent pick so far. No way you turn down Hately for free either, that's instant firing territory (as much as he's struggled so far). Hinge though, well that decision hasn't been aging well at all. Hopefully he stays healthy next year to get a shot to show something.
Click to expand...
Thought hinge looked good before he wrecked his shoulder. Hard to judge that yet.

On Pixel 5 using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Golumless said:
Negative.

There were three choices. Draft Rowe or Edwards, bring in Hinge or Edwards or bring in Hately or Edwards.

Rowe has proved a prudent pick so far. No way you turn down Hately for free either. Hinge though, well that decision hasn't been aging well at all. Hopefully he stays healthy next year to get a shot to show something.
Click to expand...
Not really, we had already selected Hately in the PSD before the ND. Rowe is a small forward and Hinge is also Rookie listed so likely we would have had to chose between Berry or Edwards, unless no one selected Luke and he was willing to be Rookie listed by us (like his brother did).
 
MarcusP2 said:
Thought hinge looked good before he wrecked his shoulder. Hard to judge that yet.

On Pixel 5 using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm hesitant too at the moment. Apparently is a skilled player, earned that spot in the preseason and honestly, he won a lot of respect from me (as meaningless as that is) for how he tried to continue player after the first dislocation.
 
ABAB said:
Not really, we had already selected Hately in the PSD before the ND. Rowe is a small forward and Hinge is also Rookie listed so likely we would have had to chose between Berry or Edwards.
Click to expand...

You select your ND picks before you select your PSD one, so yes, that was a potential choice. Even the rookie list is, as we would have been able to convert a rookie list spot into a senior list spot if we didn't select Hinge (which we agreed to before the draft).

The choice is Rowe, not Berry. We didn't pick Berry with our 5th pick, we picked Rowe. We didn't judge that small forwards was that much of a need.
 
Golumless said:
Negative.

There were three choices. Draft Rowe, bring in Hinge or bring in Hately or Edwards. Seeing both Hinge and Hately took away our 6th draftee spot, which could have been used on Luke.

Rowe has proved a prudent pick so far, with Stengle career ending, and Newchurch being a very raw prospect. No way you turn down Hately for free either, that's instant firing territory (as much as he's struggled so far). Hinge though, well that decision hasn't been aging well at all. Hopefully he stays healthy next year to get a shot to show something.
Click to expand...

There was another option. Delist or pay out a player who was on or moved to the rookie list, and move someone else from the senior list onto the rookie list. Example: delist Mackay, move Frampton to rookie list, senior spot open
 
ABAB said:
Not really, we had already selected Hately in the PSD before the ND. Rowe is a small forward and Hinge is also Rookie listed so likely we would have had to chose between Berry or Edwards.
Click to expand...
So you think a slow as **** small forward, incapable of producing forward pressure, was a more important priority to our side than a midfielder who just racked up 27 disposals against Richmond in his second game? lol.

I don't care if people flame me for it, I'm done with Hamish. He's going into the same bin as Ricciuto. Persona non grata.
 
Golumless said:
You select your ND picks before you select your PSD one, so yes, that was a potential choice. Even the rookie list is, as we would have been able to convert a rookie list spot into a senior list spot if we didn't select Hinge (which we agreed to before the draft).

The choice is Rowe, not Berry. We didn't pick Berry with our 5th pick, we picked Rowe. We didn't judge that small forwards was that much of a need.
Click to expand...
Doubtful we would have recruited both midfielders with pick 20s given we already committed to Hately, Rowe was certain to be used with one of those pick in the 20s with our 3rd or 4th pick.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Review Hamish 2021

Similar threads

W
  • Poll
Who stays: Nicks, Hamish, Kelly, Roo
2 3 4 5
Replies
118
Views
6K
GreyCrow
GreyCrow
Cleric
  • Poll
Prediction Will Hamish move to the new Tasmanian team?
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
Cleric
Cleric

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top