Maybe the Hawks wont do so great!!

[Crow-mosone]

And it might pay nicely

Neither you, nor I, nor any other expert on this forum will know the answer to that ? for 3-4 years.
As stated earlier, HFC will not die wondering, and nor should they.

maybe you should try reading the title of this thread?

 

[worthy]

if you haven't bothered to find anything out about common opinion on this years draft crop, don't be a clown and make stupid comments.

Every man and their dog related to recruitment has stated, publicly, that this years draft crop is looking poor.

That is just not correct, everything i have read is that the "experts" are saying that this is an even draft with few standouts, and that teams are just as likely to get a good player at #15 as they are at #30.
Even does not equal weak.

 

[LukeHodge15]

dont u just love the jealousy of some supporters at the hawks having
3-6-14-18-22-38........

i love it

 

[rb214]

dont u just love the jealousy of some supporters at the hawks having
3-6-14-18-22-38........

i love it

Yeah Im jealous i would much prefer to finish on the bottom of the ladder than play finals your so lucky!!

 

[Jimthegreat]

Below is the top 30 for the 2002 draft tell me how many players are actually half decent to come out of it.
And this years is a crap draft, below is clear proof that the draft is not a be all and end all i would take now maybe 4 players below in retrospect maybe!!


Round 1 1 St Kilda BRENDON GODDARD GIPPSLAND POWER 20/05/1985 189cm 82kg
Round 1 2 Kangaroos DANIEL WELLS PEEL THUNDER 03/02/1985 179.5cm 72kg
Round 1 3 Brisbane Lions JARED BRENNAN SOUTHERN DISTRICTS 28/07/1984 192.5cm 82kg
Round 1 4 Western Bulldogs TIMOTHY WALSH NORTHERN KNIGHTS 14/05/1985 194.5cm 83kg
Round 1 5 Sydney JARRAD MCVEIGH NSW/ACT RAMS 07/04/1985 184cm 70kg
Round 1 6 Port Adelaide STEVEN SALOPEK DANDENONG STINGRAYS 21/06/1985 183cm 82kg
Round 1 7 Geelong ANDREW MACKIE GLENELG 07/08/1984 191.8cm 74kg
Round 1 8 Hawthorn LUKE BRENNAN NORTH BALLARAT REBELS 03/03/1985 185cm 85kg
Round 1 9 Kangaroos HAMISH MCINTOSH MURRAY BUSHRANGERS 04/09/1984 201.8cm 100.5kg
Round 1 10 Essendon JASON LAYCOCK TASSIE MARINERS 04/11/1984 198.2cm 90kg
Round 1 11 Essendon JASON WINDERLICH GIPPSLAND POWER 10/10/1984 184cm 74kg
Round 1 12 Richmond JAY SCHULZ WOODVILLE WEST TORRENS 18/04/1985 191.5cm 86kg
Round 1 13 Fremantle BYRON SCHAMMER WEST ADELAIDE 21/06/1985 175cm 73kg
Round 1 14 Melbourne DANIEL BELL GLENELG 13/04/1985 186cm 82kg
1 15 Melbourne NICHOLAS SMITH NORWOOD 27/08/1984 195.8cm 92kg
Round 2 16 Port Adelaide STEPHEN GILHAM OAKLEIGH CHARGERS 02/09/1984 190.5cm 76kg
Round 2 17 Western Bulldogs CAMERON FAULKNER CENTRAL DISTRICT 22/05/1984 177cm 71kg
Round 2 18 Kangaroos KRIS SHORE EASTERN RANGES 23/03/1985 189cm 80kg
Round 2 19 Brisbane Lions TROY SELWOOD BENDIGO PIONEERS 01/05/1984 187.5cm 76kg
Round 2 20 Western Bulldogs WILLIAM MINSON NORWOOD 11/04/1985
Round 2 21 Collingwood BOWMAN NIXON CALDER CANNONS 25/07/1984 190cm 86kg
Round 2 22 St Kilda MATTHEW FERGUSON GIPPSLAND POWER 01/10/1984 187cm 81kg
Round 2 23 Geelong TOM LONERGAN CALDER CANNONS 17/05/1984 194cm 80kg
Round 2 24 West Coast PAUL JOHNSON DANDENONG STINGRAYS 26/06/1984 197cm 98kg
Round 2 25 Kangaroos CALLUM URCH WESTERN JETS 21/07/1984 184cm 80kg
Round 2 26 Melbourne JARED RIVERS NORTH ADELAIDE 18/10/1984 190.5cm 82.8kg
Round 2 27 Essendon DARREN WALSH SANDRINGHAM DRAGONS 27/12/1984 184.4cm 74kg
Round 2 28 Essendon TRISTAN CARTLEDGE NORTH BALLARAT REBELS 11/06/1985 196.6cm 86kg
Round 2 29 Collingwood LUKE SHACKLETON TASSIE MARINERS 17/11/1984 179cm 90.5kg
Round 2 30 Brisbane Lions DANIEL MERRETT SOUTHPORT 12/12/1984 193.6cm 91.5kg

Interestingly, I like to see some of the top 5-6 sides, plus Brisbane and Port Adelaide, and see what position their players were taken where they were in the draft. We know the Saints had some early picks but a very good blend of seniors players to work in with. On the other hand I don't think there were many early picks amongst the Swans list. A look at those lists though might tell a dfferent story.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

dont u just love the jealousy of some supporters at the hawks having
3-6-14-18-22-38........

i love it

That's just sad. No-one wishes they were you. But keep the dream if it takes the pain away.

 

[CoastBhoy]

dont u just love the jealousy of some supporters at the hawks having
3-6-14-18-22-38........

i love it

I am so so so so in owe of your ladder position , i'm speachless.

 

[worthy]

I am so so so so in owe of your ladder position , i'm speachless.

Stop please, you don't owe anymore, you've given enough already.

 

[Wotzy the clown]

15 sides lost last year. Each of them are losers. A few can pump themselves by saying they were the first loser or that they played finals then lost. But everyone in 2005 except Sydney lost. Hawthorn are doing what they believe they need to do to win flags not just to play finals footy. I think there is a big difference. Bringing a group of kids together like AC is doing will be the best thing the hawks could possible do. 17,18,19,20,21 years olds who will grow-up together and won't just be teams mates but life mates. I think it will be interesting to see what happens over the next few years.

 

[Philhawk]

I am so so so so in owe of your ladder position , i'm speachless.

im so in "awe" of the fact that you failed to win the grand final and noone will remember where the hawks placed on the ladder in 2005 , just the great players they picked up in the draft

 

[mattyc2422]

15 sides lost last year. Each of them are losers.

Correct.

 

[OneEyedHawk]

Ok Hypothetically lets see how the hawks will do in this draft I know the have pick 4,18,24 I think so that means
TIMOTHY WALSH
KRIS SHORE
PAUL JOHNSON

Wow that was worth a bottom finish Hawks. Well done

You know that, do you?

Truth is idiot, you know jack-sh**.
Stop pretending otherwise, you're just "embaracing" yourself.

 

[LukeHodge15]

im so in "awe" of the fact that you failed to win the grand final and noone will remember where the hawks placed on the ladder in 2005 , just the great players they picked up in the draft

 

[Books]

Priority picks may not be the answer.
Do you realise thet no club has ever yet won a premiership after getting PP's!?

Brisbane in 1998 is the only recent wooden spooner who did NOT qualify for a PP.

 

[Crow-mosone]

That is just not correct, everything i have read is that the "experts" are saying that this is an even draft with few standouts, and that teams are just as likely to get a good player at #15 as they are at #30.
Even does not equal weak.

isn't it funny, how the opinions change from poor to even when we get near to draft time. these very same people have stated all year that this is looking like a terrible crop, and now when the draft event needs some support it is now just 'even'. I guess it's going to be even like 1995,1998,2002 etc.

even = poor.

 

[Crow-mosone]

dont u just love the jealousy of some supporters at the hawks having
3-6-14-18-22-38........

i love it

would you love those picks in 2002?

or any of the similar rated years?

 

[Philhawk]

isn't it funny, how the opinions change from poor to even when we get near to draft time. these very same people have stated all year that this is looking like a terrible crop, and now when the draft event needs some support it is now just 'even'. I guess it's going to be even like 1995,1998,2002 etc.

even = poor.

not one of those players have played 1 minute of AFL football and you say the draft is poor? What happens if Murphy turns into a I daresay Judd ( figuratively speaking ofcourse! ) , if Ellis turns into a Dal Santo , if Hurn turns into a Hodge. Then will the draft be dubbed "poor". Your not a Kevin Sheehan Crowmosone , ill bet you havent even seen 2 of these players play and yet your going around saying this years draft is of a "poor" quality. And note , with the draft of 1995,1998 and 2002 , it was only in the following years when players in the draft failed to make a significant impact in the AFL that it was dubbed a weak draft ...

 

[Philhawk]

would you love those picks in 2002?

or any of the similar rated years?

its 2005 this year , not 2002 ..

just want to clear things up ...

 

[worthy]

would you love those picks in 2002?

or any of the similar rated years?

Most years have enough good players come out of the draft, it's more about recognising who they are and then having a bit of luck injury wise.
Goddard - would he be better in a team where he has more responsibility? clearly has class but appears to lack drive.
Wells - It's in there, it's just a matter of producing it more consistently.
J. Brennan - same as wells but with a wretched run of injurys thrown in.
Salopek - as above.
Schammer - looks ok
And so on.
Seems a few of the highly rated players from that draft have had their developement slowed with injury.
Also, many kids in this draft already playing seniors with their respective clubs which is a good sign.
The draft is a lottery, but you've got to be in it to win it.

 

[Scribe]

Some of the ponits make on this thread have been worth noting, but there's one very obvious point yet to be made - the attitude of the coaching staff at the club(s) to which these 2000 and 2002 top 30 players were drafted.

It's been made crystal clear by Clarkson & Co that they're emphasising youth and blooding almost all of their draftees from the get-go. If I were an U18 player taken in the top 30, I'd be happy to go to Hawthorn because it's the club where I have the most realistic chance of getting senior games early. Now, granted, I probably won't be playing in a finals side in the first two years, but neither would most of the top selections who go to the really strong clubs, as it's harder to get a senior game.

In my opinion, a lot of those players listed in the top 30 of 2000 and 2002 went to clubs who already had established their senior core, and they may've got a game or two in the first couple of years, but not many more. Hawthorn played Roughead, Franklin, Lewis all year, and played Young, Thurgood, Miller, Little, Boyle and Brennan selectively.

Chances are that the top 3 players drafted to hawthorn this coming draft will get good exposure, and if they cut it, then they will be rated far above their peers even after one season simply because they were given an opportunity (in a lower ranked side) to show what they were capable of, and to develop quickly.

You may be surprised at how some young players can prosper in the right environment if given a chance.

 

[CyberKev]

would you love those picks in 2002?

or any of the similar rated years?

Who knows who we would have picked-up with the picks (presumably we wouldn't have followed the set order) and how the players would have come on in that environment.

Given the way the Schwab regime badly mishandled youngsters, I suspect they all would have struggled.

Drafting is always a gamble, but at least its a proactive and positive gamble, rather than the reactive and cynical approach of topping-up with limited rejects and castoffs.

Will be hard work for the club, but at least Clarkson has a background in working with young footballers and is genuinely committed to the process.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

Some of the ponits make on this thread have been worth noting, but there's one very obvious point yet to be made - the attitude of the coaching staff at the club(s) to which these 2000 and 2002 top 30 players were drafted.

It's been made crystal clear by Clarkson & Co that they're emphasising youth and blooding almost all of their draftees from the get-go. If I were an U18 player taken in the top 30, I'd be happy to go to Hawthorn because it's the club where I have the most realistic chance of getting senior games early. Now, granted, I probably won't be playing in a finals side in the first two years, but neither would most of the top selections who go to the really strong clubs, as it's harder to get a senior game.

In my opinion, a lot of those players listed in the top 30 of 2000 and 2002 went to clubs who already had established their senior core, and they may've got a game or two in the first couple of years, but not many more. Hawthorn played Roughead, Franklin, Lewis all year, and played Young, Thurgood, Miller, Little, Boyle and Brennan selectively.

Chances are that the top 3 players drafted to hawthorn this coming draft will get good exposure, and if they cut it, then they will be rated far above their peers even after one season simply because they were given an opportunity (in a lower ranked side) to show what they were capable of, and to develop quickly.

You may be surprised at how some young players can prosper in the right environment if given a chance.

Good point. You'd love to go the Hawks just for the opportunities and support you'd be pretty sure of getting. Senior players can worry about being somewhere successful while they are still going - draftees just want to play, and the lower the club the better.

Still not sure what the relationship will be between playing the kids according to the Clarkson strategy and onfield performance, even longer term, but he's certainly making it a place young players will love to be and that has to help.

 

[Crow-mosone]

its 2005 this year , not 2002 ..

just want to clear things up ...

thanks for clearing things up Phil

now can we look forward to some real thought and analysis from you?

 

[Crow-mosone]

not one of those players have played 1 minute of AFL football and you say the draft is poor? What happens if Murphy turns into a I daresay Judd ( figuratively speaking ofcourse! ) , if Ellis turns into a Dal Santo , if Hurn turns into a Hodge. Then will the draft be dubbed "poor". Your not a Kevin Sheehan Crowmosone , ill bet you havent even seen 2 of these players play and yet your going around saying this years draft is of a "poor" quality. And note , with the draft of 1995,1998 and 2002 , it was only in the following years when players in the draft failed to make a significant impact in the AFL that it was dubbed a weak draft ...

How old are you Phil?

Let me clear something up, the above is a complete, made up fabrication. these drafts were well known to be poor long beforehand. What on earth makes you think that no one knew at the time?

I suspect you're new to this, because each one I countered with followed what was considered (at the time) to be a great draft i.e. 1994, 1997, 2001.
In this case, the 2005 draft class was being spoken about as being poor prior to last years draft!
In the same way, next years draft class is being talked up.
But I guess, no one knew that 2006 was supposed to be a good class til after hey champ?

 

[Crow-mosone]

Most years have enough good players come out of the draft, it's more about recognising who they are and then having a bit of luck injury wise.
Goddard - would he be better in a team where he has more responsibility? clearly has class but appears to lack drive.
Wells - It's in there, it's just a matter of producing it more consistently.
J. Brennan - same as wells but with a wretched run of injurys thrown in.
Salopek - as above.
Schammer - looks ok
And so on.
Seems a few of the highly rated players from that draft have had their developement slowed with injury.
Also, many kids in this draft already playing seniors with their respective clubs which is a good sign.
The draft is a lottery, but you've got to be in it to win it.

yeah you're right you have to be in to win it. But if you look at the classes above, it is plain that their isn't enough good players in every year. The fact of the matter is, that in average years, there is a real shortage of meaningful players.

If you refer to the 02 class above, really you are being kind to a couple of them. Goddard and Brennan have been major disappointments, wells has talent but is a cameo guy, Salopek - pfft, schammer is a nice player.
so that's really 2 guys in the first 13 picks!!!!