Analysis Hawks 2022 Hypothetical trades (read the pinned post)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #2
Firstly, the "No Kane Cornes" Rule is back




 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please don't get me started on Kane F%#ng Cornes.

The media narrative last year was that we didn't do enough and should've traded out our veteran players, fast forward six months and the narrative became Mitchell & O'meara are worth nothing now and that we have the worst list in the AFL according to Kane with no young stars.

So now that we rectify that and start bringing some picks in for kids he's done a 180 and we should've kept them.

The guy just sprouts sh1t to be relevant.
 
You can simply ignore him if it winds you up. Personally I find it a laugh and it gives us some good ammunition when it blows up in his face.

It's give and take. I'm sure when we are up and about again he will be one of the first to polish our balls. Loves kicking the s**t teams because they're easy.

I do ignore him, thanks.

We'll have to agree to disagree that he provides anything of value.
 
I know people love to hate on Kane Cornes but I don't think he is far off the mark here. Right now, the club looks to be all over the shop. There must be a few senior players scratching their heads and I imagine that Sam Mitchell has some serious talking to do with regards to the plan and how he intends to get there. Right now, the getting there seems to be a very complex and difficult task for the club. It could flounder for many years. There are also the cascading effects of attracting players, membership, sponsorship and game attendance. If we look at the trend over the past 5 years or so we can see that the successful clubs such as, Geelong and Richmond get what they need and do it quite seamlessly. The three-way trade that delivered Tom Mitchell to Collingwood (plus pick 25) and Henry to Geelong is a classic case of that.
You do realise that Mitchell and Omeara were moving on regardless next year right? Omeara made it clear that he wants to finish his career in WA and Mitchell doesn’t suit the game plan and Hawks won’t offer him the money he is after. Letting them go now is better than keeping and getting worse picks next year. Our senior players knew that all this was going to happen this year or next year. Bruest, Sicily and others stuck around because they are invested in the youngsters and plan, not because of Mitchell and Omeara.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I think Mitchell and O'Meara had age against them of cause, but they also appeared to lack the ability to learn a new position. An also lose some bad habbit, like O'Meara fending off too much and Mitchell setting team mates up to fail with a handball to the feet. An this is why i believe we have moved them on.

Both seem like genuine blokes, who were great team men. I wish them every success.
 
You do realise that Mitchell and Omeara were moving on regardless next year right? Omeara made it clear that he wants to finish his career in WA and Mitchell doesn’t suit the game plan and Hawks won’t offer him the money he is after. Letting them go now is better than keeping and getting worse picks next year. Our senior players knew that all this was going to happen this year or next year. Bruest, Sicily and others stuck around because they are invested in the youngsters and plan, not because of Mitchell and Omeara.
If your coach shopped you around last year, decreased your role and shopped other senior team mates two years in a row, your mindset about the future is going to be very different. Do you think omeara leaves had we decided we wanted him to lead the young players into the future? We created the situation (wrongly or rightly) for him to leave. Same with Mitchell. Mitchell would have played out his career at hawthorn had we allowed it.
 
I think Mitchell and O'Meara had age against them of cause, but they also appeared to lack the ability to learn a new position. An also lose some bad habbit, like O'Meara fending off too much and Mitchell setting team mates up to fail with a handball to the feet. An this is why i believe we have moved them on.

Both seem like genuine blokes, who were great team men. I wish them every success.
Freo have offered omeara a four year deal and he will likely play the same role as he did at hawthorn this year. Hardly a sign that he is too old and can’t play any other role but inside mid.
 
I’m coming around on the omeara deal. I prefer the future second v pick 30 (being the only other option). If the dogs collapse we might snag a top 30 pick. My memory of meek was from our game last year, and he wasn’t impressive at all. But looks like he has improved substantially on that season so maybe he is better than the backup ruck.

My biggest issue is we have traded out our experienced leaders and don’t get the benefit of landing top picks in return. We have spoken publicly about improving the draft hand and we only managed to nudge it a bit next year. We haven’t landed the top ten pick and it seems like we had no real plan but salary cap dump to land one. And it’s clear we were well off the pace in trying to land a salary cap dump with gc. So we took an unambitious plan in and didn’t achieve our primary goal (at least yet).

As much as we all would have hated it, trading out an emerging star in CJ or DGB to gain an extra pick is a much braver move. I understand some people see this as a risk to the culture but we just gave away two former vice captains, one of whom has captained the club this year and could have been captain of the club had we gotten behind him as a leader. I understand Sam wants to move on from them as players but they are still light years ahead of every other mid except Newcombe. It’s not that they are denying players opportunities it’s that the players we have are not ready for the responsibility.

Was Jordan Lewis better or worse off playing behind sewell, Mitchell and hodge? Was Joel Selwood worse off for playing behind Bartel, Ablett and Kelly? I would have thought it was the making of them. Whoever we take in this draft is going to get opportunities regardless assuming they are good enough. But when they come they are going to have to carry a bigger load than is optimal. Fine for Newcombe, who was physically and mentally ready but most players aren’t like him. Can’t see, for example, butler flourishing in the seniors until he gets a lot fitter and builds his strength. I think even MacDonald will benefit from not having to spend significant time in the centre square.

Anyway, while we didn’t land the picks, we have landed a couple of players that could fit into our rebuild. More speculative than I would like but no going back now!

If Worpel and stephens can come into the side as part of our centre square mid rotations (Worpel really needs to set the standard in there) and meek can be a first/second ruck then things will look pretty good out of the trade. Sam is going to have to enlist some of the young players who are highly self motivated and have a strong desire to win, to set the standards and culture of the side. Big responsibility!
I agree that we didn't achieve our primary goals, I'm definitely disappointed in that.

I think light years might be a bit dramatic in terms of where other players are compared to those that have left. The midfield will probably be a struggle, but will at least be a point of interest - Moore with more regular midfield minutes isn't light years behind Mitchell or Jaeger. From Rd 17 onwards (when he was moved into the centre) he averaged 24 disposals, 5.5 tackles, 4.5 inside 50s, 4 clearances and 6.5 score involvements. That includes games like the Dogs, Saints and Richmond where he had more forward line responsibilities and less CBAs. Worpel may be able to return to the form in 2019 that had him win a B&F, a fit Wingard could do the same.

Remains to be seen how that impacts us. I would have always preferred to keep Jaeger, but it seems like he was just as driven to seek a trade as we were to trade him so I don't think it was avoidable. I do strongly disagree with you on one point, trading someone like CJ would have been stupid and not brave - not just risk to culture, but risk to membership sales, viewership and so much more. It would be tantamount to trading Cyril back in 2011.
 
You answered the the question of risk in your reply… We got an internally highly rated 21 year old that didn’t get all his opportunities due to a Geelong midfield and injury, if he comes on the trade improves. We took a 24 year old ruckman to bolster our stocks, if he comes on the trade improves. We got a future second in a highly touted draft, potential to move up next year and we have a bunch of points that could potentially move up this year or next, if we do and the potential draftees come on, the trade improves. These are risks we took. I said to a mate last night that I’m keeping my glass half full until it gets knocked over or topped up. Time will tell how we really went in the trade period I think.
Also if the players who leave happen to not find form/ injuries the trade improves (yes I know this is close to injury trolling )
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

HAWTHORN club banner


KANE SAYS: It is impossible to understand what the Hawks set out to achieve here. They bring in a 27-year-old free agent on massive money, but lose their two most accomplished midfielders and their best forward. Hard to see how they win more than six games and the damage of the repeated beatings on the young group will be scarring. Imagine how James Sicily, who is 27 and just signed a five-year contract, is feeling this morning knowing he has not a chance to win a premiership at Hawthorn. What a fall for such a great club.

IN:
Lloyd Meek
Cooper Stephens
Karl Amon
Pick 41, 48, 50
Future 2nd (FRE), Future 4th (BRI)

OUT:
Jaeger O’Meara
Tom Mitchell
Jack Gunston


Oh how much I love Kane! No chance of a flag in the next 6 years!

I wonder seeing we traded out these players if it would have been better to let Sicily go as a free agent.
 
Getting so offended by him and calling/texting SEN or lambasting him on social media is exactly what he's after. You're only helping to build his brand as the Aussie version of Skip Bayless.

His role is to be controversial, topical and offensive to fans. There's a reason why he's so sort after in the media... ratings.

None do it better really.

Yes - the ratings juggernauts that are SEN and Footy Classified.
 
I think he's fairly off the mark on a few points.

"It is impossible to understand what the Hawks set out to achieve here." - Given the reduction in centre bounce attendances from both O'Meara and Mitchell I'd have thought it was plainly obvious what we set out to achieve.

"[Karl Amon] on massive money" - clearly not if you look at what was reported and Port Adelaide's compensation.

"Lose ... their best forward." - Gunston is no longer our best forward, and he's 31.

"Imagine how James Sicily, who is 27 and just signed a five-year contract, is feeling this morning knowing he has not a chance to win a premiership at Hawthorn." - Kane wouldn't have rated us a chance to win a premiership even with Gunston, O'Meara and Mitchell so this is insincere at best. Sicily might not win a flag, but he'd also be aware that flags are pretty bloody rare - plenty of fantastic careers have come to a close without nabbing one, it's just the reality of playing in an 18 team competition with 1 winner each year.

You're also assuming that the players aren't already in the loop with what Sam is trying to do. Sam is many things but I don't think you could say he's been guarded in any way on what he wants to do, or how he wants to get there. I'd reckon the players are completely aware of what's going on.

IMO the crux of Cornes' message rings true. Consider that we lost Gunston and traded out Mitchell and O'Meara and what we got in exchange is a couple of footballers that have been unable to prove they can play AFL and small change in draft picks. Has the club improved its position? Is the path to the future clear?
 
Can someone answer this please:

If you can only take to the draft as many picks as you have list spots available can you trade during the actual draft for more picks than list spots to match a bid?

For example:

Brisbane enter draft night with 4 list spots available and have 4 picks.

When a bid comes for Ashcroft can Brisbane then trade 1 pick for 4-5 picks to help match a bid?
 
I know people love to hate on Kane Cornes but I don't think he is far off the mark here. Right now, the club looks to be all over the shop. There must be a few senior players scratching their heads and I imagine that Sam Mitchell has some serious talking to do with regards to the plan and how he intends to get there. Right now, the getting there seems to be a very complex and difficult task for the club. It could flounder for many years. There are also the cascading effects of attracting players, membership, sponsorship and game attendance. If we look at the trend over the past 5 years or so we can see that the successful clubs such as, Geelong and Richmond get what they need and do it quite seamlessly. The three-way trade that delivered Tom Mitchell to Collingwood (plus pick 25) and Henry to Geelong is a classic case of that.
But I thought Geelong did trades seamlessly?
 
As someone who is sceptical about our offseason moves, I still wouldn’t buy into a Kane Cornes narrative of despair and chaos 😉

I just don't think he can be simply dismissed. Maybe his language is a bit strong (intentional) but it is what at least some people are thinking, and we really didn't come out of the trade in a better position. We haven't got a fistful of picks to use. We basically have the same picks we went into the trade period with plus small change. I am sure that players at the club would not have expected this outcome moving forward.
 
IMO the crux of Cornes' message rings true. Consider that we lost Gunston and traded out Mitchell and O'Meara and what we got in exchange is a couple of footballers that have been unable to prove they can play AFL and small change in draft picks. Has the club improved its position? Is the path to the future clear?
I don't know whether the path to the future is clear. I would imagine Cornes doesn't either.

We would have to ask the playing group and hope for an honest response.
 
Can someone answer this please:

If you can only take to the draft as many picks as you have list spots available can you trade during the actual draft for more picks than list spots to match a bid?

For example:

Brisbane enter draft night with 4 list spots available and have 4 picks.

When a bid comes for Ashcroft can Brisbane then trade 1 pick for 4-5 picks to help match a bid?
You can only match bids with the number of spots available(you can't just stock up on ten pick 40's eg), once a bid comes you're locked from trading your first pick.
 
I just don't think he can be simply dismissed. Maybe his language is a bit strong (intentional) but it is what at least some people are thinking, and we really didn't come out of the trade in a better position. We haven't got a fistful of picks to use. We basically have the same picks we went into the trade period with plus small change. I am sure that players at the club would not have expected this outcome moving forward.

It can be dismissed when it is beyond hypocritical and just Kane blowing a fuse for the sake of Kane blowing a fuse. He is contradicting what he said about our list a matter of months ago.

As Stranglers posted:

Yet back in May this year he said about JOM and Mitchell:

"They're essentially worthless. What would you get for Tom Mitchell? There wasn’t (a market) last year and there won’t be again this year,” he said.

“He touched the footy 14 times (against Essendon), their (the Bombers) speed was able to expose Hawthorn’s midfield late. (The Hawk were) plodding along. It was very much on display late in that game and they were overrun with the Bombers’ power.

“It’s a real issue for Sam Mitchell and how he manages a midfield that looks very same with the personnel they’ve got.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top