Autopsy Round 19 = Hawthorn 133-67 Collingwood

[No SPIN]

1. A lot of 21 year olds have deficiencies in attitude - if they are talented you work with them on that and turn them into good players.

2. We obviously didn't predict the train wreck of a year before we made the Schultz trade, but we should have factored the possibility in when we decided to make the trade - that is what you need to do when trading future picks. Given we had just recently made one of the all time howler 'future first round' pick trades, I'd have thought the club would have learnt.

3. Schultz can't have fitted our need 'given Ginnivan's exit', because Ginnivan didn't ask to leave until we had traded for Schultz.

4. Even worse - Shultz was due to be a free agent at end of this year... So we basically traded a future first and a second round for 1 year of Schultz..

Ginnivan has some talent but his attitude was poor and obviously thought not to be redeemable. I’d take the certainty of Schultz who’ll offer application and effort rather than the flaky Ginnivan.
Schultz definitely fitted, given our poor opinion of Ginnivan whose cards were stamped.
No one had a crystal ball so this absurd narrative about the pick is just hindsight and a waste of time.

 

[slugger01]

Haw finished 15th 2004, 14th 2005, 11th 2006 before their flag in 2008.
They finished 15th in 2020, 14th 2021, 13th 2022, 16th 2023 - so their current resurgence has been based on multiple years at the bottom.

OMFG!!!
3 years below the top half of the ladder 2004-2006.
And 4 years after they were in 4 GF's in a row, winning 3 in a row.
Seriously?? HUGE EFFECT!!

That counts for being bottom of the ladder for "multiple years"??? And were those the catalyst for their 11 premierships and a further 5 GF appearances in the period i presented?

Now, if that was the case, tell me why St Kilda, Melbourne, North, Freo, etc haven't had the same or close-to success as Hawthorn. I'm sure they finished lower on the ladder a lot more times that the "multiple years" that Hawks did!!

 

[No SPIN]

You live up to your username you know how to spin yourself in to anything.

When you have facts you don’t need spin.

 

[No SPIN]

OMFG!!!
3 years below the top half of the ladder 2004-2006.
And 4 years after they were in 4 GF's in a row, winning 3 in a row.
Seriously?? HUGE EFFECT!!

That counts for being bottom of the ladder for "multiple years"??? And were those the catalyst for their 11 premierships and a further 5 GF appearances in the period i presented?

Now, if that was the case, tell me why St Kilda, Melbourne, North, Freo, etc haven't had the same or close-to success as Hawthorn. I'm sure they finished lower on the ladder a lot more times that the "multiple years" that Hawks did!!

It just reinforces the importance of good administration.
Rich was a basket case, with an unmatched Coaching merry go round. Then finally install a great President and things turn around.
Including backing his Coach when times were bleak.

You can keep collecting 1st RD draft picks but without decent administration you’re going not going anywhere.
So now explain to me why the current resurgence of Haw will NOT be due to years at the bottom collecting talent.
And similarly NM.

 

[slugger01]

That’s a stretch.

Though it’s true that the coaches wanted Ginni out.

You along with many others clearly still wanted him around.

I’m not fussed. He wasn’t a good fit.

Was more disappointed Mick drove Sav out.

Jath, i really didn't care if the coaches wanted him out, or if he stayed or played with us.
My issue is we gave him away for free. A quality player. And we paid pots of gold for a player that we didn't need, and is 7 years older, that is not 7 times better than Ginni.

My point is .. our trading record recently has been poor, and we have often depreciated our position because of our poor trades.

Recent examples - Selling Treloar, Grundy, Ginni, and buying Beams, SchultZ, trading picks in future years for magic beans, etc.

 

[slugger01]

It just reinforces the importance of good administration.
Rich was a basket case, with an unmatched Coaching merry go round. Then finally install a great President and things turn around.
Including backing his Coach when times were bleak.

You can keep collecting 1st RD draft picks but without decent administration you’re going not going anywhere.
So now explain to me why the current resurgence of Haw will NOT be due to years at the bottom collecting talent.
And similarly NM.

Refer to Geelong for your answers!!!!

 

[No SPIN]

Refer to Geelong for your answers!!!!

And Coll - we win flags and don’t bottom out.
But at least you concede it’s inarguable that Haw will get back into flag contention by years at the bottom.

 

[loki04]

Noble deserved premiership NOT Ginnivan.
Ginnivan plays one good game and you think he shouldn’t have been traded, conveniently forgetting all his issues both on and off the field.
If he showed the same application last year as he did yesterday he would never have been traded.

Schultz is a much more complete player.

Schultz is 26 and was delisted a bit over 3 years ago.

Ginnivan is 6 months older the ND plenty of growth in a 20 yo.

 

[loki04]

And Coll - we win flags and don’t bottom out.
But at least you concede it’s in arguable that Haw will get back into flag contention by years at the bottom.

We bottomed out in 2021 17th...

 

[Do_Beta_Rapport]

We bottomed out in 2021 17th...

A poor season isn’t bottoming out

Bottoming out is usually a term used for a side anchored near the bottom of the ladder for a number of years.

 

[loki04]

It just reinforces the importance of good administration.
Rich was a basket case, with an unmatched Coaching merry go round. Then finally install a great President and things turn around.
Including backing his Coach when times were bleak.

You can keep collecting 1st RD draft picks but without decent administration you’re going not going anywhere.
So now explain to me why the current resurgence of Haw will NOT be due to years at the bottom collecting talent.
And similarly NM.

It's not about just getting first rounders it's about making sure you don't gamble trade them in years you have NFI of where you will finish for role players.

There needs to be balance had between the now and one eye on the future.

People aren't suggesting tanking for 5 years. Just stop trading out of future drafts unless you are getting a genuine superstar in prime years.

 

[Do_Beta_Rapport]

Noble deserved premiership NOT Ginnivan.
Ginnivan plays one good game and you think he shouldn’t have been traded, conveniently forgetting all his issues both on and off the field.
If he showed the same application last year as he did yesterday he would never have been traded.

Schultz is a much more complete player.

To me, it’s not even just application.

It’s game style. Look at Dylan Moore yesterday, a heap of touches up the ground. They push their smalls right up and create space.

The Hawks are humming at the moment but they have a long way to go. Let’s see how Ginnivan goes if the Hawks don’t maintain this run.

 

[jathanas]

Jath, i really didn't care if the coaches wanted him out, or if he stayed or played with us.
My issue is we gave him away for free. A quality player. And we paid pots of gold for a player that we didn't need, and is 7 years older, that is not 7 times better than Ginni.

My point is .. our trading record recently has been poor, and we have often depreciated our position because of our poor trades.

Recent examples - Selling Treloar, Grundy, Ginni, and buying Beams, SchultZ, trading picks in future years for magic beans, etc.

Fair. Did not like the way Treloar was shown the door. Bringing Beams back, don't get me started.

Retrospectively the club gave Ginni away dirt cheap but at the time I didn't see much upside in him.

Won't argue with you but at times like this, it's too easy to focus on the f* ups. Nobody was complaining last year.

Peace, slugger.

 

[manicpie]

It's not about just getting first rounders it's about making sure you don't gamble trade them in years you have NFI of where you will finish for role players.

There needs to be balance had between the now and one eye on the future.

People aren't suggesting tanking for 5 years. Just stop trading out of future drafts unless you are getting a genuine superstar in prime years.

We have potentially the best player in the comp and he's only 21yo. I think we'll be trading future firsts for a while to come. Hopefully, the next time will be for a better quality player than Schultz

 

[loki04]

A poor season isn’t bottoming out

Bottoming out is usually a term used for a side anchored near the bottom of the ladder for a number of years.

Yeah I get what he was meaning but you still are down wether it is 1 or 2 years you are still hitting bottom which your team overall talent wise should benefit from.

We had ND coming so was much of a muchness, but they again should of waited to see the pick range before they traded it and got more bang for buck.

It's like the list management team are addicted to gamble hoping to win but every time they have done it, it has come back to bite them on the arse.

 

[loki04]

We have potentially the best player in the comp and he's only 21yo. I think we'll be trading future firsts for a while to come. Hopefully, the next time will be for a better quality player than Schultz

So instead of building a group to come up with him you want to continue overpaying and gamble?

Great it will be like the Buckley years in the 90s.

 

[manicpie]

So instead of building a group to come up with him you want to continue overpaying and gamble?

Great it will be like the Buckley years in the 90s.

It's not what I want I reckon it's what the club will do. I don't think we want to bottom out

 

[loki04]

I remember in the 2022 season when the ginni drama started fly did support him, I watched his pressers every week. The problem was ginni went and made things worst for himself with the whole drug saga which didn’t go down well in the club obviously and then the punting thing he did before granny etc…..

Tbh I think the club lost their patience with him and thought he was not worth the trouble, easier just to trade him out.


Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com

As big a fan of Jacks that I am, he practically signed his own death warrant when he rocked up to mad Monday in a jockey suite after flying comments about him.

 

[No SPIN]

We bottomed out in 2021 17th...

Follow the thread back, to get context.

 

[loki04]

It's not what I want I reckon it's what the club will do. I don't think we want to bottom out

Imo they should look to do it before Tasmania comes in, then when they land look at trade in the gaps.

Nick has no side kick his age.

Pendles had Thomas.
Reid had Brown.
Steele had Beams (great recuiting).
Degoey and Moore.


Nick is flying solo on an island with a dearth of sub 23yo talent on list.

 

[FromTheBoundaryLine]

Hawks are going ok and have a young list but let’s see how they go. Apparently they didn’t beat much on the weekend.
P.S. If Ginnivan’s match amounted to a demolition of us it’s probably the least impressive demolition I’ve seen.

 

[Jelly Bean]

Yeah I get what he was meaning but you still are down wether it is 1 or 2 years you are still hitting bottom which your team overall talent wise should benefit from.

We had ND coming so was much of a muchness, but they again should of waited to see the pick range before they traded it and got more bang for buck.

It's like the list management team are addicted to gamble hoping to win but every time they have done it, it has come back to bite them on the arse.

Let's not forget that the pick we traded to GWS (which was pick 2) was a live pick used before the Nick Daicos bid came in - which we would have used if we had it. So we would have had our pick 2 (which ended up being Finn Callaghan) AND Nick Daicos.

 

[loki04]

1. A lot of 21 year olds have deficiencies in attitude - if they are talented you work with them on that and turn them into good players.

2. We obviously didn't predict the train wreck of a year before we made the Schultz trade, but we should have factored the possibility in when we decided to make the trade - that is what you need to do when trading future picks. Given we had just recently made one of the all time howler 'future first round' pick trades, I'd have thought the club would have learnt.

3. Schultz can't have fitted our need 'given Ginnivan's exit', because Ginnivan didn't ask to leave until we had traded for Schultz.

4. Even worse - Shultz was due to be a free agent at end of this year... So we basically traded a future first and a second round for 1 year of Schultz..

The problem is and it extends to some on this board every time they stuff a future trade up they are drawing it back to bad luck and unforeseen season.

Hence there is no aversion to do it again as next time we will get it right ..

 

[No SPIN]

It's not about just getting first rounders it's about making sure you don't gamble trade them in years you have NFI of where you will finish for role players.

There needs to be balance had between the now and one eye on the future.

People aren't suggesting tanking for 5 years. Just stop trading out of future drafts unless you are getting a genuine superstar in prime years.

But going to the draft is not the guarantee of success you keep assuming it will be.
I’d rather trade for known quantities and established players.
I’d argue the 5 Top 30 picks we used in draft from a few years ago, just proves the point of the draft being a lottery.

 

[loki04]

Hawks are going ok and have a young list but let’s see how they go. Apparently they didn’t beat much on the weekend.
P.S. If Ginnivan’s match amounted to a demolition of us it’s probably the least impressive demolition I’ve seen.

Hawks are second to the Swans on the form ladder iirc we make it 11 wins.